GIFT    OF 
EVGENE  MEYER9«. 


THE    LIFE 

OF 

ROBERT    TOOMBS 


THE  LIFE 

OF 

ROBERT  TOOMBS 


BY 

ULRICH  BONNELL  PHILLIPS,  PH.D. 

PROFESSOR   OF   AMERICAN   HISTORY   IN  THE 
UNIVERSITY  OF  MICHIGAN 


NEW   YORK 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
1913 

All  rights  reserved 


COPYRIGHT,  1913 
BY  THE  MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

Set  up  and  ekctrotyped.     Published  June,  1913 


THB»PLIMPTON«PRBSS 
NORWOOD*  M  A  S  S  •  U-  S- A 


«0 

tf 

a; 


TO  THE  MEMORY  OF 
MY  MOTHER 


268672 


PREFACE 

AT  the  inception  of  this  work  it  was  intended  to  be  a 
joint  product  by  the  late  Colonel  John  C.  Reed,  of 
Atlanta,  and  myself.  Colonel  Reed,  who  was  in  his  early 
manhood  a  captain  in  the  Confederate  army  and  in  his 
later  years  when  I  knew  him  a  genial  and  high-hearted 
veteran,  was  a  life-long  adorer  of  Robert  Toombs.  He  had 
assembled  a  mass  of  his  hero's  correspondence,  had  col 
lected  a  quantity  of  the  humorous  and  epigrammatic  say 
ings  in  which  Toombs  was  remarkably  prolific  whether  in 
public  or  private  speech,  had  made  Toombs  the  leading 
figure  in  his  excellent  book,  The  Brothers1  War,  and  had 
looked  forward  to  writing  his  full  biography.  He  at  first 
cordially  accepted  my  overtures  for  a  joint  biography;  but 
soon  afterward  bethought  him  that  the  labor  would  be  too 
great  for  his  declining  strength,  and  determined  to  confine 
himself  to  the  preparation  of  a  slender  independent  work 
on  Toombs's  "winged  words."  He  thereupon  most  gener 
ously  handed  over  to  me  his  treasured  Toombs  letters  with 
the  understanding  that  I  was  to  decipher  them  and  send  him 
copies  and  that  each  of  us  should  thereupon  use  the  material 
at  discretion.  Colonel  Reed  unfortunately  died,  in  January, 
1910,  before  he  had  made  any  progress  with  his  task.  He 
had  appointed  me  his  literary  executor,  but  no  papers  of 
importance  were  found  among  his  effects.  It  happens  that 
I  am  neither  a  hero-worshipper  nor  a  collector  of  pithy 
sayings  —  that  my  interest,  indeed,  lies  more  in  social  his 
tory  than  in  biography.  But  Toombs  is  as  interesting 
to  me  as  a  type  and  product  as  he  was  to  Colonel  Reed 


viii  PREFACE 

as  an  individual.  And  he  was  so  clear  in  his  analyses 
and  so  telling  in  his  expressions  that,  though  I  have  relied 
little  upon  his  traditional  sayings,  I  have  quoted  his  authen 
tic  speeches  more  abundantly  than  is  common  in  brief 
biographies.  Whenever  his  words  are  given,  the  phrase 
is  likely  to  be  found  both  pointed  and  sparkling.  There 
have  been  few  Americans  who  habitually  spoke  and  wrote 
as  interestingly  and  tellingly  as  he. 

Toombs' s  favorite  character  in  literature  was  Falstaff; 
and  he  himself  more  or  less  unconsciously  showed  certain 
Falstaffian  characteristics.  But  his  braggadocio  was  com 
bined  with  matter-of-fact-ness  and  high  purpose;  his  comedy 
was  mingled  with  tragedy;  his  self-indulgence  stopped  short 
at  conviviality;  and  in  public  affairs  he  was  among  the  most 
austere  of  men.  When  he  quoted,  as  he  often  did,  Fal- 
stafFs  request  to  Prince  Henry,  "Rob  me  the  exchequer," 
he  invariably  put  the  words  into  the  mouths  of  the  plunder 
ers  whom  he  was  opposing.  Colonel  Reed  was  fond  of 
discussing  Toombs' s  Falstaffian  phases,  and  his  book  would 
have  been  rich  in  humor.  Something  of  these  qualities  in 
Toombs  will  doubtless  appear  in  my  narrative,  but  most  of 
it  must  be  read  between  the  lines.  I  have  been  chiefly 
concerned  with  his  incisive  criticism  of  public  issues  and 
his  now  moderate,  now  headlong  championship  of  public 
programmes.  With  little  manifest  mirth  at  his  antics  or 
fellow-feeling  in  his  grief,  I  have  endeavored  to  use  his 
career  as  a  central  theme  in  describing  the  successive  prob 
lems  which  the  people  of  Georgia  and  the  South  confronted 
and  the  policies  which  they  followed  in  their  efforts  at 
solving  them.  In  regard  to  the  personal  career  of  Toombs, 
my  narrative  probably  demonstrates,  what  my  studies  have 
made  plain  to  me,  that  Toombs  was  primarily  an  American 
statesman  with  nation-wide  interests  and  a  remarkable 
talent  for  public  finance,  but  the  stress  of  the  sectional 
quarrel  drove  him,  as  it  had  driven  Calhoun  before  him, 


PREFACE  ix 

into  a  distinctly  Southern  partisanship  at  the  sacrifice  of 
his  American  opportunity. 

The  location  of  all  important  documents  quoted  or  referred 
to  is  given  in  the  footnotes  except  in  the  case  of  numer 
ous  letters  written  by  or  to  Toombs,  Stephens  or  Howell 
Cobb.  Virtually  all  of  these,  where  no  other  indications 
are  given,  are  embodied  in  a  collection  which  I  have  edited 
for  publication  as  volume  two  of  the  Report  of  the  Ameri 
can  Historical  Association  for  1911,  which  will  be  issued 
during  the  current  year  by  the  U.  S.  Government  Printing 
Office. 

Numerous  persons  have  given  willing  and  courteous 
assistance  in  my  pursuit  of  materials.  Aside  from  Colonel 
Reed  the  chief  ones  of  these  have  been  Mr.  W.  J.  DeRenne, 
of  Wormsloe,  near  Savannah,  who  is  the  hospitable  proprietor 
of  the  best  private  library  yet  assembled  on  the  history  of 
Georgia,  Mr.  William  Harden,  the  librarian  of  the  Georgia 
Historical  Society  at  Savannah,  Mrs.  A.  S.  Erwin  of  Athens, 
Ga.,  Miss  Julia  A.  Flisch  of  Augusta,  Ga.,  Dr.  J.  F.  Jame 
son  of  the  Carnegie  Institution  of  Washington,  Mr.  Gaillard 
Hunt  of  the  Library  of  Congress,  and  Mr.  Worthington  C. 
Ford  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society.  Miss  Ger 
trude  Byrne  of  New  Orleans  and  others  of  my  students  in 
the  historical  seminary  at  Tulane  University  during  my 
residence  there  kindly  afforded  me  the  use  of  such  of  their 
notes  as  bore  upon  Toombs's  career.  My  wife  has  given 
valuable  criticism  and  zealous  aid  in  the  preparation  of  the 
book. 

ULRICH  BONNELL  PHILLIPS 

ANN  ARBOR,  MICHIGAN, 
April,  1913. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.    THE  COUNTRY,  THE  PEOPLE,  AND  THE  POLITICS  OF  MIDDLE 

GEORGIA 3 

.II.    TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER n 

III.  A  SOUTHERN  WHIG  IN  CONGRESS       . 25 

IV.  THE  PROVISO  CRISIS  AND  THE  COMPROMISE  OF  1850  .     .  49 
V.    THE  GEORGIA  PLATFORM 89 

VI.    A  SENATOR  IN  THE  FIFTIES 116 

VII.      TOOMBS    ON   THE    SLAVEHOLDING    REGIME 155 

VIII.    THE  ELECTION  OF  1860 167 

IX.    THE  STROKE  FOR  SOUTHERN  INDEPENDENCE      ....  194 

X.    THE  STRESS  OF  WAR 232 

XL    AN  UNRECONSTRUCTED  GEORGIAN 252 

INDEX                           275 


THE  LIFE  OF  ROBERT  TOOMBS 


THE 
LIFE  OF  ROBERT  TOOMBS 


CHAPTER  I 

THE  COUNTRY,  THE  PEOPLE  AND  THE  POLITICS  OF 
MIDDLE  GEORGIA 

THE  life  and  opinions  of  Robert  Toombs  are  of  interest 
on  their  own  account  as  those  of  a  vigorous,  clear-cut 
and  true-hearted  leader  in  public  affairs,  advocating  modera 
tion  where  feasible  and  heroic  remedies  where  necessary. 
His  career,  however,  derives  its  chief  significance  from  his 
typifying  the  life  and  demonstrating  the  problems,  views 
and  purposes  of  the  community  from  which  he  sprang.  He 
was  striking  as  a  man;  he  is  illuminating  as  a  representative. 

The  piedmont  region  in  the  South  had  many  talented 
spokesmen  in  Toombs's  generation.  The  community  while 
sturdy  and  self-trustful  was  conscious  of  its  problems,  alert 
to  receive  the  opinions  of  its  public  men,  eager  to  support 
their  approved  policies  and  to  praise  their  worthy  services. 
It  is  not  strange  that  such  a  condition  should  produce  in 
a  single  neighborhood  not  fifty  miles  square,  in  the  Savannah 
drainage  basin  of  the  piedmont,  Calhoun  and  McDuffie  on 
the  Carolina  side  of  the  river  and  Stephens  and  Toombs  in 
Georgia. 

In  ante-bellum  parlance  "Middle  Georgia"  was  not  the 
central  portion  of  the  state,  but  was  the  piedmont  tract 
along  the  eastern  boundary.  The  name  originated  about 
the  time  of  the  achievement  of  American  independence, 
when  the  settlements  in  Georgia  formed  a  slender  line  along 
the  Savannah  river.  The  upper  portion  of  this  line  lay  in 


X4**  TH£'L:IFE,OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  rugged  and  unfruitful  mountains,  the  lower  portion 
mainly  comprised  the  sandy  flats  of  the  pine-barrens,  while 
its  middle  stretches  spread  over  the  pleasant  and  fertile 
piedmont.  No  wonder  it  grew  endeared  to  its  people  as 
"Middle  Georgia."  It  lies  as  a  rolling  plateau,  sloping 
from  about  a  thousand  feet  above  sea-level  on  the  north 
west  down  to  a  third  of  that  elevation  on  its  south-eastern 
edge  at  the  fall-line  of  its  rivers.  Its  hills  and  dales  have  a 
soil  varying  from  red  clay  to  gray  sand,  all  made  from  the 
weathering  of  the  underlying  granite  and  similar  rocks. 
Without  prairies  or  extensive  swamps,  the  country  when 
white  men  entered  it  was  covered  with  oak  and  hickory 
forests  interspersed  with  tracts  of  pines;  and  this  forest 
growth  flourishing  through  the  preceding  centuries  had 
covered  the  land  with  a  layer  of  rich  mold  which  rejoiced 
the  hearts  of  the  farmers  in  their  clearings,  but  which  needed 
careful  husbanding  to  prevent  its  being  washed  away  by 
the  heavy  rains  common  in  the  region.  The  soil  and  climate 
are  suitable  for  producing  with  moderate  success  all  the 
crops  which  flourish  in  temperate  zones;  but  their  special 
aptitude  is  for  cotton,  and  the  district's  epoch  of  marked 
prosperity  did  not  begin  until  the  establishment  of  cotton 
production  upon  a  substantial  scale  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  Ever  since  that  time  cotton  growing 
has  continued  to  be  the  chief  industry,  although  in  recent 
decades  cotton  manufacturing  has  flourished  as  well. 

Toombs's  father,  Major  Robert  Toombs,  had  commanded 
a  force  of  Virginia  troops  operating  against  the  British  in 
Georgia  at  one  time  during  the  Revolution,  and  in  reward 
was  granted  a  tract  of  three  thousand  acres  in  Wilkes  county 
about  five  miles  from  Fort  Washington,  which  was  then 
giving  place  to  the  town  of  Washington.  On  this  tract  he 
made  his  home  in  1783.  The  earliest  settlers  in  the  dis 
trict  had  preceded  him  by  barely  a  decade.  The  farms 
were  still  nothing  more  than  clearings,  and  the  social  regime 


THE    MIDDLE-GEORGIA    PEOPLE  5 

was  for  the  most  part  as  crude  as  upon  the  average  American 
raw  frontier.  It  happens  that  we  have  a  glimpse  of  condi 
tions  at  and  about  the  village  of  Washington,  written  in 
1787  by  Sarah  Hillhouse,  a  bride  recently  arrived  from  New 
England,  in  a  letter  to  her  father: 

"There  are  a  few,  and  a  very  few,  Worthy  good  people  in 
the  country,  near  us,  but  the  people  in  general  are  the  most 
prophane,  blasphemous  set  of  people  I  ever  heard  of.  They 
make  it  a  steady  practice  (if  they  have  money)  to  come  to 
town  every  day  if  possible,  and  as  Mr.  Hillhouse  is  the  only 
person  who  keeps  Liquors,  we  have  the  whole  throng  around 
us,  as  many  as  fifty  at  a  time,  take  one  day  with  another, 
and  sometimes  when  any  public  business  is  done,  which  is 
often,  fourteen  or  sixteen  hundred  standing  so  thick  that 
they  look  like  a  flock  of  Blackbirds,  and  perhaps  not  one  in 
fifty  but  what  we  call  fighting  drunk.  .  .  .  They  have  spent 
in  our  cellar  for  liquor  in  one  day  Thirty  Pounds  Stg.,  and 
not  a  drop  carried  I  rod  from  the  store,  but  sit  on  a  log  and 
swallow  it  as  quick  as  possible."  * 

At  that  time  Wilkes  county  was  a  backwoods  settlement, 
largely  comprised  of  disbanded  Revolutionary  troops, 
officers  and  men,  who  had  been  granted  land  by  the  state. 
That  the  rank  and  file  should  be  rough-mannered  was  quite 
natural;  but  it  is  not  to  be  assumed  that  everyone  in  the 
county  flocked  with  the  crowd  which  Mrs.  Hillhouse 
described.  The  officers  were  likely  to  hold  aloof,  as  were 
also  the  men  of  old  families  from  Virginia  and  the  Carolinas, 
who  were  beginning  to  enter  the  district  in  search  of  fresh 
lands  to  replace  those  which  had  been  worn  out  by  excessive 
tobacco  cropping. 

With  passing  years  conditions  rapidly  improved.  In 
1790  the  Indian  boundary  which  till  then  had  lain  within 
twenty  miles  of  Washington  was  moved  a  score  of  miles 
westward,  and  was  again  moved  about  forty  miles  further 

*  The  Alexander  Letters,  1787-1900.  Savannah,  Ga.,  1910  (privately 
printed),  pp.  16,  17. 


6  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

west  in  1802-1804.  Wilkes  county  was  thus  relieved  of 
alarms  from  Indian  forays  and  was  likewise  relieved  of  the 
roughest  element  of  its  own  population,  which  drifted  west 
behind  the  retreating  Creeks  and  Cherokees.  Meanwhile 
Whitney  invented  his  gin  in  1793;  successful  experiments 
in  producing  cotton  in  "Middle  Georgia"  upon  a  commer 
cial  scale  in  the  later  nineties  brought  brilliant  profits, 
and  the  country  promptly  became  a  Mecca  for  well-to-do 
Virginians  and  Carolinians  and  their  plantation  forces.  The 
hardships  of  the  frontier  and  their  replacement  by  easier 
conditions  are  indicated  by  Major  Toombs's  domestic 
fortunes.  During  his  early  years  in  Wilkes  county  he 
married  and  lost  two  wives  in  rapid  succession;  but  his 
third  wife,  Catherine  Ruling,  lived  to  a  ripe  age  and  reared 
six  strong  children.  The  fifth  of  these,  born  July  2,  1810, 
was  Robert  Augustus,  who  dropped  his  middle  name  in  early 
manhood,  and  who  in  his  prime  and  ever  after  was  endeared 
to  all  Georgians  as  "Bob  Toombs." 

At  the  time  of  his  birth  the  sparse  clearings  had  been 
broadened  and  multiplied,  and  Wilkes  county  had  become 
settled  by  a  fairly  dense  population  as  American  standards 
of  density  went  in  that  generation;  the  rough  manners  had 
become  softened,  and  the  small  farms  were  interspersed  with 
plantations.  Squads  of  negro  slaves  worked  the  broader 
fields,  and  their  total  number  came  to  comprise  a  little 
more  than  half  the  population.  Some  of  the  earlier  pioneers 
drew  free  lands  in  the  lottery  distribution  of  the  new  Indian 
cessions  acquired  by  the  state,  and  sold  their  Wilkes  hold 
ings  to  the  incoming  planters.  Some  of  the  yeomen  pros 
pered  modestly  and  bought  from  the  traders  a  few  slaves 
to  help  them  in  their  field  work;  and  some  continued  as 
non-slaveholders  to  till  their  own  fields  unaided  except  by 
their  wives  and  sons  and  daughters.  As  for  the  slave 
squads,  most  of  them  comprised  from  five  to  twenty  laborers, 
and  not  three  planters  could  be  found  in  a  day's  journey 


THE     MIDDLE-GEORGIA    PEOPLE  7 

who  owned  above  fifty  slaves  each.  With  the  very  poor 
traffic  facilities  prior  to  the  building  of  railroads,  the  freight 
ing  of  supplies  from  the  seaboard  was  of  course  confined 
mostly  to  such  essential  supplies  as  could  not  be  produced 
by  domestic  labor.  All  industry  was  rural,  for  the  few 
widely  separated  villages  were  inhabited  in  the  main  only 
by  merchants,  court-house  officials,  lawyers  and  physicians. 
A  small  cotton  factory  was  established  in  Wilkes  county  in 
1811  because  of  the  restraint  then  imposed  upon  foreign 
trade,  and  it  doubtless  prospered  moderately  during  the 
war  of  1812;  but  the  return  of  high  cotton  prices  after  that 
war  again  enlisted  all  available  capital  in  plantation  opera 
tions,  and  for  the  rest  of  the  ante-bellum  period  industrial 
energies  were  almost  wholly  devoted  to  agriculture.  In 
normal  times  homespun  comfort  was  the  common  reward 
of  thrift,  though  little  that  savored  of  luxury  prevailed. 
In  manners  there  was  fair  sobriety,  marked  probity, 
frankness  and  vigor,  pronounced  individualism,  general 
kindliness  and  occasional  courtliness.  It  was  the  most  whole 
some  community  in  the  sturdy  commonwealth.  Major 
Toombs  was  one  of  the  well-to-do  planters,  and  young 
Robert,  reared  among  the  best  advantages  which  the  coun 
tryside  afforded,  acquired  the  views  and  customs  which  pre 
vailed  around  him,  including  the  current  opinions  upon 
public  questions.  For  example,  the  discussion  of  impress 
ments  which  he  heard  in  childhood  gave  him  an  enduring 
belief  in  British  tyranny,  and  the  struggle  in  his  boyhood 
between  Georgia  and  the  United  States  government  imbued 
him  with  a  devotion  to  state  rights. 

During  the  eighteen-twenties  Alabama  and  Mississippi 
began  to  flood  the  market  with  their  cotton  and  to  depress 
its  price,  while  in  the  Carolinas  and  "Middle  Georgia" 
the  land  was  losing  its  fertility  and  crops  were  growing 
more  meager.  At  the  same  time  the  people  of  the  middle 
and  eastern  states  were  striving  to  increase  the  tariff  pro- 


8  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

tection  on  the  goods  which  they  were  selling  to  the  cotton 
belt  and  to  increase  the  federal  expenditure  for  internal 
improvements  in  their  own  region.  Indian  lands,  banking 
and  slavery  furnished  additional  issues.  During  the  earlier 
decades  of  the  century  the  people  of  Georgia  had  indulged 
in  local  faction-fighting  at  the  expense  of  their  attention  to 
federal  policy.  The  new  issues  in  the  later  twenties  and  the 
thirties  required  the  turning  of  attention  afresh  to  congres 
sional  affairs,  whereupon  it  was  found  that  the  old  leaders 
were  outworn  and  a  new  supply  was  necessary.  The  young 
men  who  responded  to  the  call  bore  much  the  same  stamp 
and  largely  maintained  the  traditions  of  those  whose  mantles 
had  fallen  upon  them,  except  that  they  based  their  issues 
more  upon  measures  than  upon  personalities.  The  previous 
generation  had  comprised  men  of  marked  strength,  such  as 
James  Jackson,  Abraham  Baldwin,  William  H.  Crawford, 
John  and  Elijah  Clarke,  and  George  M.  Troup.  Some  of 
these  were  rough,  some  of  them  polished;  some  were  short 
sighted  partisans,  some  longsighted  champions  of  sound 
statecraft;  some  headlong,  some  prudent,  but  all  were 
vigorous,  indomitable,  high-spirited,  plain  in  life  and  plain 
of  speech,  incorruptible,  and  devoted  to  the  commonwealth 
of  Georgia.  Of  these  the  Clarkes  had  been  mere  faction 
leaders  without  constructive  policy;  and  Baldwin,  a  con 
structive  statesman,  had  been  cut  off  by  an  untimely  death. 
Jackson,  Crawford  and  Troup,  the  successive  leaders  of  the 
faction  later  known  as  the  State  Rights  party  and  then  merged 
with  the  Whigs,  shaped  the  political  traditions  of  the  state. 
Jackson  in  his  speeches  and  Troup  in  his  state-papers  were 
ardent,  even  headlong  advocates,  sometimes  suffering 
defeat  by  very  reason  of  their  violence,  but  oftener  succeed 
ing  in  their  purpose  of  overwhelming  their  opponents. 
Crawford  was  more  quiet,  more  genial  and  more  versatile, 
succeeding  sometimes  by  stalwart  argument,  sometimes  by 
more  ingratiating  persuasion;  but  suffering  final  defeat 


THE     MIDDLE-GEORGIA    PEOPLE  9 

in  his  ambition  for  the  Presidency  by  letting  it  appear  that 
he  relied  rather  upon  secret  scheming  than  upon  his  merits 
as  a  sound  and  vigorous  public  servant.  Crawford  in  fact 
rendered  splendid  service  in  Congress  and  the  Cabinet  until 
about  1816  when  he  unfortunately  began  a  long  resting  upon 
his  oars  which  had  not  ended  when  he  was  stricken  with 
paralysis.  As  regards  policies,  Jackson,  Crawford  and 
Troup  were  all  champions  of  state  rights,  Indian  expulsion, 
low  tariff,  conservative  finance,  and  the  safeguarding  of  all 
Southern  interests. 

Jackson  died  in  1807,  Crawford  was  paralysed  in  1824, 
and  Troup  retired  from  public  life  in  1833.  To  fill  their 
places  a  number  of  aspirants  came  forward  possessing  a 
variety  of  qualities  but  none  of  whom  for  a  decade  or  two 
were  at  once  talented  and  vigorous  enough  to  establish 
a  definite  ascendency.  George  R.  Gilmer  and  Wilson 
Lumpkin,  of  plain  manners  and  ordinary  ability,  were  zeal 
ous  champions  of  Georgia  in  the  Cherokee  struggle;  John 
Forsyth  and  John  M.  Berrien  were  polished  gentlemen  and 
brilliant  speakers,  but  were  opportunists  in  policy.  The 
former  a  diplomat,  the  latter  a  constitutional  lawyer,  both 
were  so  much  engrossed  with  forms  and  methods  that  they 
were  ^  disqualified  for  initiating  and  resolutely  maintaining 
policies  through  good  and  evil  fortune.  Augustin  S.  Clay 
ton  was  public-spirited  enough  to  launch  a  cotton  factory 
at  his  home  at  Athens  in  1838,  and  to  declare  in  Congress 
a  few  years  later  that  his  profits  in  manufacturing  were 
unreasonably  great  under  the  tariff,  and  was  sufficiently 
staunch  a  judge  on  the  Georgia  bench  to  assert  in  defiance 
of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  in  the  Cherokee  issue: 
"I  only  require  the  aid  of  public  opinion  and  the  arm  of  the 
executive  authority,  and  no  court  on  earth  besides  our  own 
shall  ever  be  troubled  with  this  question";  but  he  destroyed 
his  availability  as  a  leader  by  his  enthusiastic  endorsement 
of  nullification  in  sympathy  with  the  excited  South  Carolin- 


10  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

ians  but  against  the  more  moderate  judgment  of  the  bulk  of 
the  Georgia  people.  On  the  whole,  during  the  thirties 
Georgia  was  relatively  devoid  of  spokesmen  except  in  regard 
to  the  Cherokee  struggle.  There  were  new  issues  pressing 
to  be  formulated,  vital  causes  demanding  champions,  and 
a  people  eager  to  welcome  any  leaders  who  should  ring  true. 
In  response  to  this  demand  there  emerged  into  public  life 
Robert  Toombs  and  his  fellows  of  the  group  reaching  their 
prime  in  the  forties  and  fifties  and  making  Georgia  the 
pivotal  state  of  the  South  in  the  secession  movement. 


CHAPTER  II 
TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER 

AS  boy  and  as  man  Toombs  differed  from  the  standard 
manly  product  of  the  plantation  regime  only  in  being 
unusually  vigorous,  talented  and  self-confident.  The  free 
dom  from  care  in  which  planters'  sons  were  reared,  the  abun 
dant  opportunity  for  indoor  pranks  and  outdoor  sports, 
the  affectionate  and  indulgent  admiration  of  the  slaves, 
the  camaraderie  of  the  neighbors'  children,  added  their 
influence  to  the  fond  care  of  parents,  the  devotion  of  brothers 
and  sisters  and  the  somewhat  capricious  discipline  of  primi 
tive  schoolmasters  in  the  stamping  of  character.  Matur 
ing  with  normal  speed,  young  Toombs  was  active  and  alert, 
fun-loving  and  fond  of  striking  situations  whether  of  his  own 
or  of  others'  making.  The  rollicking  boy  was  father  to  the 
boyish  man  with  his  great  faculty  for  hilarious  laughter, 
and  his  occasional  failure  while  controlling  others  to  control 
himself. 

From  his  plantation  home  young  Toombs  went  at  the  age 
of  fourteen  to  the  University  of  Georgia,  then  more  com 
monly  known  as  Franklin  College,  at  Athens.  There  his 
fellow-students,  only  a  few  score  in  number,  were  nearly  all 
planters'  sons  like  himself,  liberty-loving  and  not  too  studi 
ously  inclined;  the  faculty  was  meager,  the  resources  scant, 
the  curriculum  unalluring  and  the  discipline  stringent. 
Moses  Waddell,  the  president,  had  had  a  long,  successful 
career  as  a  master  of  a  private  academy,  and  carried  academy 
methods  into  the  conduct  of  the  college.  Alonzo  Church, 
the  young  professor  of  mathematics,  was  a  willing  adminis- 


12  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

trator  of  Waddell's  rules.  Thirty  years  later  when  Church 
was  himself  president  of  the  college  he  required  of  his  pro 
fessors  the  same  dormitory  espionage  over  the  students 
which  he  had  performed  under  Waddell,  and  the  brothers, 
John  and  Joseph  LeConte  resigned  their  chairs  and  pursued 
in  more  congenial  surroundings  their  brilliant  careers  as 
scientists.  Some  of  the  most  talented  teachers  have  in  all 
ages  refused  to  be  taskmasters  and  policemen;  and  thou 
sands  of  youths  at  college  have  maintained  that  if  they  were 
not  to  be  led,  they  would  not  be  driven.  Alexander  H. 
Stephens,  who  attended  Franklin  College  a  few  years  later 
than  Toombs,  lived  in  Dr.  Church's  own  household  during 
his  whole  course  without  any  friction;  but  Stephens  was  a 
frail,  sober  and  conscientious  youth,  while  Toombs  was  full- 
blooded,  self-indulgent  and  flamboyant.  In  their  prime 
these  twain  were  wonderful!}*  congenial  and  kindred  in  their 
outlook,  but  in  youth  they  were  radically  unlike.  Stephens, 
painfully  introspective,  would  take  a  certain  gloomy  pleasure 
in  what  savored  of  martyrdom,  while  in  Toombs  dry  text 
books,  dull  drillmasters,  and  stringent  regulations  could 
inspire  neither  dread  nor  loyalty,  nor  gain  long  submission. 
In  his  first  and  second  years  he  probably  followed  the  fixed 
routine,  keeping  up  with  the  classwork  easily  and  finding 
large  leisure  to  romp  with  his  fellows  and  apparently  also 
to  get  acquainted  with  a  few  favorite  characters  in  litera 
ture,  particularly  Falstaff  and  Don  Quixote,  and  to  exchange 
views  with  any  with  whom  he  might  upon  current  questions 
of  politics.  By  his  third  year,  when  he  was  sixteen  years 
old,  he  had  mastered  the  ins  and  outs  of  college  life,  pierced 
the  foibles  of  his  professors,  developed  a  precocious  talent 
in  oratory,  and  acquired  a  nonchalance  which  proved  the 
ruin  of  his  career  at  Franklin  College. 

While  records  of  Toombs  as  a  student  are  scant,  the  col 
lege  community  at  Athens  treasures  a  number  of  traditions 
concerning  him,  of  which  two  relate  to  the  manner  of  his 


TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER        13 

leaving  college.  The  first  runs  to  the  effect  that  near  the 
end  of  his  third  year,  after  several  previous  conflicts  with  the 
authorities,  he  was  about  to  be  reported  by  a  proctor  for  a 
breach  of  the  rules,  whereupon  Toombs  hurried  to  the  presi 
dent  in  advance  of  the  proctor  and  obtained  an  honorable 
dismissal  from  the  college.  Then  when  later  in  the  day 
Dr.  Waddell  meeting  him  on  the  campus  began  to  chide  him, 
the  youth  informed  the  president  with  hauteur  that  he  was 
addressing  one  not  under  his  authority  but  a  free-born 
American  citizen.  The  second  legend  runs  that  after  this 
Toombs  stayed  on  at  Athens  rill  commencement,  biding 
his  time  for  a  culminating  escapade.  The  college  chapel 
of  that  day,  standing  on  the  site  of  the  present  one  which 
dates  from  1832,  was  a  small  structure  of  boards  whose 
furthest  interior  could  easily  be  reached  by  a  strong  voice 
from  without  the  building,  particularly  in  the  warm  August 
commencement  season  when  all  the  windows  and  doors  were 
thrown  open.  Directly  in  front  of  the  chapel  and  not  twenty 
yards  from  its  door  stood  a  giant  oak  whose  spreading 
branches  would  shade  a  throng  of  listeners.  And  the  story 
runs  that,  mounting  an  improvised  rostrum  under  the  tree 
at  the  hour  when  his  fellows  approved  by  the  faculty  had 
begun  their  programme  of  speeches  in  the  chapel,  young 
Toombs  began  an  address  in  such  vigorous  tones,  with  such 
eloquent  phrasing  and  such  telling  humor  that  the  audience 
within  began  to  quit  their  seats  and  drift  out  of  the  building 
to  enjoy  the  novel  occasion;  and  Toombs  did  not  conclude 
his  harangue  rill  the  speakers  inside  had  been  left  with  but 
empty  benches  before  them.  Whether  this  tale  be  true  in 
its  details  no  man  may  say,  but  for  many  years  before  the 
disappearance  of  the  old  tree  it  was  pointed  out  as  the 
"Toombs  Oak,"  the  showpiece  of  the  campus,  and  as  such 
it  was  held  in  affectionate  regard  by  the  quickly  succeeding 
generations  of  students.  In  the  present  writer's  under 
graduate  days  there  in  the  middle  eighteen-nineties  its  top 


14  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

had  broken  off  and  its  middle  was  hollow  with  decay.  As 
the  seasons  passed  it  then  lost  branch  after  branch  until 
but  a  stump  remained;  and  now  one  of  the  classes  has 
placed  a  marble  sun-dial  to  mark  the  spot  where  flourished 
the  oak  and  the  rebel  Toombs. 

The  self-willed  youngster  had  doubtless  received  more 
impress  from  affairs  without  than  within  the  classroom  dur 
ing  his  residence  at  the  college.  The  board  of  trustees 
comprised  the  leading  politicians  of  the  state,  and  at  their 
meetings,  as  was  commonly  known  at  the  time,  there  was 
more  discussion  of  party  slates  than  of  college  administra 
tion.  During  the  decade  of  the  twenties  in  fact  the  annual 
meeting  of  the  trustees  at  commencement  served  as  the 
official  caucus  of  the  Troup  or  State  Rights  party.  The 
citizens  of  Athens,  furthermore,  were  alert  in  political 
matters  and  occasionally  held  massmeetings  to  discuss  the 
issues  confronting  the  state.  These  meetings  were  held 
in  the  college  chapel,  where  of  course  many  of  the  students 
were  interested  listeners.  The  students  also  had  flourish 
ing  debating  societies  of  their  own,  whose  weekly  discussions 
were  by  no  means  confined  to  classical  topics.  In  1828, 
for  example,  the  students  adopted  a  resolution  to  appear 
at  the  commencement  exercises  in  homespun  garments 
as  a  protest  against  the  protective  tariff;  the  board  of  trus 
tees  officially  commended  their  patriotic  demonstration; 
and  under  Augustin  S.  Clayton's  leadership  the  citizens  held 
a  great  anti-tariff  massmeeting  in  the  chapel.  Toombs 
had  taken  his  leave  before  this  time,  but  he  had  been  present 
during  the  earlier  developments  which  led  up  to  this  cli 
max,  and  doubtless  had  political  ambition  and  state-rights 
predilections  indelibly  stamped  upon  him  by  the  regime. 

After  his  exit  from  Athens,  Toombs  was  sent  by  his  guar 
dian  to  Union  College,  New  York,  from  which  he  was 
graduated  in  1828.  He  then  studied  law  at  the  University 
of  Virginia,  and  returning  home  was  admitted  to  the  bar 


TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER        15 

in  March,  1830,  after  examination  in  open  court  at  Elberton 
by  William  H.  Crawford  who  was  spending  his  declining 
years  as  a  circuit  judge,  though  still  dreaming  of  presiden 
tial  honors.  Toombs  married  Miss  Julia  DuBose  in  the 
same  year  and  began  the  practise  of  law  in  the  town  of 
Washington  while  still  but  twenty  years  of  age.  For  the  next 
six  or  seven  years  his  professional  life  was  that  of  the  average 
promising  and  rising  young  lawyer.  He  read  law  assidu 
ously,  rode  the  circuit  of  the  neighboring  counties  regularly, 
listened  attentively  to  the  arguments  of  his  elders  at  the 
bar,  handled  his  own  cases  with  energy,  and  sought  out  and 
remedied  his  own  shortcomings.  He  relieved  the  monotony 
of  the  lawyer's  life  by  occasional  speeches  on  the  hustings 
in  support  of  the  candidates  of  the  State  Rights  party, 
and  once  when  there  was  an  alarm  of  war  with  the  Creeks 
he  plunged  into  the  organization  of  a  company  of  volunteers 
and  as  its  captain  reached  the  scene  of  hostilities  only  to 
find  that  peace  had  been  restored  and  his  company  must 
be  disbanded.  In  his  domestic  life  the  only  events  in  these 
years  were  the  births  of  his  three  children.  With  a  true 
mate  in  his  wife  and  a  friend-in-need  in  his  brother  Gabriel, 
Toombs  was  adored  and  adoring  in  his  family  circle,  as 
radiant  in  its  tranquillity  as  he  was  in  the  most  exhilarating 
strife  at  the  bar  or  in  the  forum.  His  domestic  felicity  was 
in  these  years  and  long  afterwards  a  spur  in  his  labors  and 
an  anchor  against  recklessness  in  public  policy  and  private 
conduct.  He  was  throughout  life  also  a  kindly  master  to 
his  slaves,  a  prudent  manager,  a  cordial  neighbor,  an  eager 
host,  a  firm  friend  and  a  guileless  foe.  His  blemishes  were  an 
occasional  too  great  impetuousness  and  a  fondness  for  strong 
drink  which  he  held  in  check  until  the  defeat  of  his  patriotic 
policies,  the  death  of  his  last  remaining  daughter  and  the 
chronic  illness  of  his  wife  in  the  closing  years  of  his  life  broke 
his  power  of  resistance. 

The  story  of  Toombs's  progress  at  the  bar  has  been  told 


16  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

by  the  late  Colonel.  John  C.  Reed  who  began  practise  in  the 
same  circuit  in  the  fifties  and  adopting  Toombs  as  his  hero, 
began  early  to  gather  data  on  his  career.  His  account, 
though  not  as  full  as  he  hoped  to  write,  can  hardly  be 
improved  by  a  layman  writing  in  the  twentieth  century:  * 

"  For  four  years  the  famous  William  H.  Crawford  was  the 
judge  of  the  circuit.  Toombs  was  born  into  the  Crawford 
faction,  and  the  judge  .  .  .  gave  him  favor  from  the  first. 
The  courts  were  full  of  lucrative  business.  The  old  dockets 
show  that  in  five  years  Toombs  was  getting  his  full  share 
in  his  own  county  and  the  adjoining  ones.  The  diligent 
attention  that  he  gave  every  detail  of  preparation  of  his 
cases  had  in  a  year  or  two  after  his  call  made  him  first 
choice  of  every  eminent  lawyer  for  junior.  One  of  these  was 
Francis  T.  Cone,  a  native  of  Connecticut.  .  .  .  Toombs, 
who  had  known  the  great  American  lawyers  of  his  time 
always  said  after  his  death  in  1859  that  Cone  was  the  best 
of  them  all.  .  .  .  Another  of  these  was  [Joseph  Henry]  Lump- 
kin.  He  is,  I  believe,  the  most  eloquent  man  that  Georgia 
ever  produced.  .  .  .  Whether  Toombs  had  them  as  asso 
ciates  or  as  adversaries,  they  were  always  in  these  early 
years  of  his  at  the  bar,  in  his  eye.  With  .  .  .  unremitted 
attentiveness  .  .  .  and  a  receptivity  always  active  and 
greedy,  he  seems  to  have  soon  appropriated  all  of  Cone's 
law  and  all  of  Lumpkin's  advocacy.  ...  In  due  time  when 
Cone  or  Lumpkin  were  with  him,  he  would  be  pushed  for 
ward,  young  as  he  was,  into  some  important  place  in  court 
conduct.  I  myself  have  heard  Lumpkin  tell  that  the  great 
est  forensic  eloquence  he  had  ever  heard  was  a  rebuke  by 
Toombs  —  then  some  twenty-seven  years  old  —  of  the  zeal 
with  which  the  public  urged  on  the  prosecution  of  one  of 
their  clients  on  trial  for  murder.  The  junior  —  the  evi 
dence  closed  —  was  making  the  first  speech  for  the  defense. 
As  he  went  on  in  a  strong  argument,  the  positiveness  with 
which  he  denied  all  merit  to  the  case  for  the  state  angered 
the  spectators  outside  of  the  bar,  and  a  palpable  demonstra 
tion  of  dissent  came  from  some  of  them,  which  the  presid 
ing  judge  did  not  check  as  he  ought  to  have  done.  Toombs 

*  J.  C.  Reed,  The  Brothers'  W'ar,  pp.  218-221.  (Copyrighted  by  Little, 
Brown  &  Co.) 


TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER        17 

strode  at  once  to  the  edge  of  the  bar,  only  a  railing  some  four 
feet  high  separating  him  from  these  angry  men,  and  chastised 
them  as  they  merited.  His  invective  culminated  in  denoun 
cing  them  as  bloodhounds  eager  to  slake  their  accursed  thirst 
in  innocent  blood.  These  misguided  ones  were  brought 
back  to  proper  behavior,  and  with  them  admiration  of  the 
fearless  and  eloquent  advocate  displaced  their  hostility  and 
carried  upon  an  invisible  wave  an  influence  in  favor  of  the 
accused  over  the  entire  community  and  even  into  the  jury 
box.  And  the  narrator,  who  was  one  of  Toombs's  greatest 
admirers,  told  with  fond  recollection  how  the  popular  billows 
were  laid  by  his  junior,  and  how  he  himself  took  heart  and 
found  the  way  to  an  acquittal  which  he  feared  he  had  lost. 
.  .  .  [Toombs]  divined  what  offered  cases  are  unmaintainable 
more  quickly  and  declined  them  more  resolutely  than  any 
one  I  ever  knew.  So  free  was  he  from  illusion  that  he  could 
not  contend  against  plain  infeasibility.  It  was  impossible  for 
clients,  witnesses  or  juniors  to  blind  him  to  the  actual  chances. 
For  ten  years  or  more,  commencing  with  1867,  I  observed 
him  in  many  nisi  prius  trials,  and  I  noted  how  infrequently, 
as  compared  with  others,  he  had  either  got  wrong  as  to  his 
own  side,  or  misanticipated  the  other.  But  now  and  then 
it  would  develop  that  the  merits  were  decidedly  against 
him.  He  would  at  once,  according  to  circumstances,  pro 
pose  a  compromise,  frankly  surrender,  or,  if  it  appeared  very 
weak,  toss  the  case  away  as  if  it  was  something  unclean." 

It  was  during  Toombs's  fourth  year  on  the  circuit  that  he 
made  the  acquaintance  of  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  two  years 
his  junior,  and  instituted  that  Damon  and  Pythias  friend 
ship  which  lasted  their  lives  long.  Thirty  years  afterward 
Stephens  wrote  of  their  first  meeting: 

"Toombs  was  at  the  court  when  I  was  admitted.  Fwas 
not  introduced  to  him,  however.  The  next  week  I  went  over 
to  Wilkes,  and  there  we  became  personally  acquainted; 
but  how  I  do  not  recollect.  Our  acquaintance  soon  grew 
to  intimacy.  We  were  associated  in  some  cases  in  1835; 
in  1836  we  were  very  friendly,  and  by  this  time  always 
occupied  the  same  room  when  we  went  on  circuit.  In  1838 
he  proposed  to  lend  me  money  to  travel  for  my  health.  We 
had  been  in  the  legislature  together  in  1837.  He  attended 


18  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

to  nearly  all  the  business  that  my  brother  could  not  do  when 
I  was  gone."  * 

Stephens  had  already  begun  to  sprout  political  wings 
by  making  an  address  in  championship  of  the  principle  of 
state  rights  on  the  fourth  of  the  same  July  in  which  he  was 
admitted  to  the  bar;  and  in  1836  he  entered  the  state  legis 
lature,  a  year  ahead  of  Toombs.  It  was  quite  possibly  in 
response  to  Stephens's  urging  that  Toombs  added  state 
craft  to  law  as  a  field  for  his  ambition. 

In  1837  most  of  the  earlier  issues  in  Georgia  politics  had 
reached  adjustment  and  passed  into  history;  but  their 
impress  was  left  upon  the  thought  of  the  people  and  the 
alignment  of  parties.  The  Creek  and  Cherokee  crises  had 
been  passed  in  1825  and  1832  in  such  way  that  Georgians 
prided  themselves  upon  the  victory  of  their  state  and  were 
ready  for  another  brush  with  the  federal  government  if  a 
new  occasion  should  arise.  The  tariff  struggle  had  been 
ended  by  the  compromise  of  1833  in  such  way  that  the  cotton- 
planting  interest,  while  generally  disapproving  the  doctrine 
of  nullification,  denounced  Jackson's  threat  of  coercion  and 
swore  fresh  allegiance  to  state  rights.  As  regards  party 
alignments,  the  Troup  and  Clarke  factions  had  lost  their 
original  leaders  and  had  come  to  support  measures  rather 
than  men.  The  Clarke  faction,  now  calling  itself  the  Union 
party,  held  fast  to  its  alliance  with  the  Jacksonian  Democ 
racy;  the  Troup  following,  now  calling  itself  the  State  Rights 
party,  reacted  against  Jackson's  ruthlessness  concerning  the 
rights  of  the  states  and  of  Congress.  In  the  campaign  of 
1836  this  party  joined  the  general  rally  of  groups  throughout 
the  country  in  the  effort  to  defeat  Van  Buren,  and  carried 
the  vote  of  Georgia  for  Hugh  L.  White  as  a  "State-Rights 
Whig."  The  triumph  of  Van  Buren  in  the  electoral  college 
merely  prodded  his  Georgia  opponents  to  greater  exertions. 

*  Johnston  and  Browne,  Life  of  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  p.  89. 


TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER        19 

In  the  fall  election  of  1837  Toombs  as  a  Whig  nominee  won 
his  first  candidacy  and  was  sent  to  the  legislature  in  spite 
of  the  fact  that  Wilkes  county  was  accustomed  to  cast 
Democratic  majorities.  He  was  probably  elected  less  as  a 
Whig  than  as  a  favorite  son.  He  was  returned  to  the  lower 
house  of  the  assembly  at  each  following  annual  election 
until  1843,  except  that  of  1841  when  he  was  not  a  candidate. 

In  these  years  the  legislature  was  troubled  mainly  with 
financial  problems.  During  the  previous  decade  the  whole 
country  had  been  indulging  in  business  inflation.  The 
prices  of  cotton,  slaves  and  land  were  rising  to  extraordinary 
heights,  and  the  cotton  belt  was  revelling  in  the  "flush  times." 
With  citizens  eager  to  clear  new  lands  and  buy  more  slaves 
to  raise  more  cotton,  the  state  governments  had  been  per 
suaded  to  raise  money  on  public  credit  and  lend  it  to  their 
citizens  at  moderate  interest  rates  for  private  uses.  As  an 
item  in  this  regime  the  state  of  Georgia  had  established  in 
1828  a  curious  institution  called  the  Central  Bank  of  Georgia 
with  capital  consisting  of  all  moneys,  bonds  and  stocks  owned 
by  the  state  and  all  debts  due  it.  The  directors  were  author 
ized  to  issue  bank  notes  at  discretion  and  were  required  to 
distribute  most  of  its  available  funds  in  loans  to  citizens 
throughout  Georgia.  The  institution  was  in  effect  the  state 
treasury  subjected  to  the  control  of  a  special  commission 
instructed  to  administer  its  resources  in  accordance  with  the 
practises  of  wild-cat  banking.  At  the  same  time  the  laws 
of  the  state  permitted  the  private  chartered  banks  to  issue 
notes  to  the  amount  of  twice  their  capital.  The  general 
regime  of  course  invited  panic.  Revulsion  came  in  1837 
when  credit  was  disturbed  in  the  Northern  commercial 
centers,  and  was  renewed  in  1839  when  cotton  prices  after 
a  temporary  bolstering  collapsed  and  stayed  in  collapse  for 
five  disastrous  years. 

It  was  just  in  this  period  of  stress,  1837  to  1844,  when  the 
assembly  was  wrestling  with  proposals  for  mitigating  the 


20  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

calamities,  that  Toombs  was  in  the  lower  house,  first  as 
a  private  member  and  then  as  chairman  successively  of 
the  committees  on  judiciary,  internal  improvements,  and  the 
state  of  the  republic.  The  fight  was  heroic  between  the 
advocates  of  further  inflation  as  a  cure  for  the  effects  of 
inflation  on  one  side,  and  the  champions  of  sound  money 
and  rugged  honesty  on  the  other;  and  in  each  succeeding 
December  session  Toombs  was  steadily  in  the  thickest  of 
the  fight  as  a  leader  of  the  conservatives.  In  1837  he 
opposed  unsuccessfully  a  bill  to  authorize  the  Central  Bank 
to  borrow  $150,000  with  which  to  complete  a  series  of  citi 
zens'  loans;  in  1838  he  and  Stephens  defeated  a  bill  to 
increase  that  bank's  capital  by  $5,000,000;  and  in  1842 
when  its  notes  had  depreciated  and  the  bank  was  heavily 
involved,  he  not  only  fought  against  a  proposal  to  prolong 
its  activities  but  upon  suffering  defeat  by  116  votes  to  71 
he  and  thirty-six  other  members  presented  a  formal  protest 
whose  phrasing  indicates  Toombs's  own  authorship.  It 
contended  that  the  experiment  of  banking  upon  the  credit 
of  the  state  had  already  proved  a  failure,  contributing 
largely  to  the  destruction  of  the  public  credit  and  sullying 
the  honor  of  the  state;  that  by  the  inherent  vices  of  the 
system,  and  by  its  mismanagement  and  consequent  losses, 
the  bank  had  created  a  stern  necessity  for  universal  and 
heavy  taxation  to  sustain  the  public  credit,  and  it  denounced 
the  bill  just  passed  because  of  its  prolongation  of  irresponsi 
bility.*  A  similar  battle  was  waged  over  proposals  for 
staying  the  execution  of  mortgages.  In  1840  the  Governor 
in  a  special  message  urged  the  enactment  of  a  stay-law. 
Toombs  opposed  it  by  his  speeches  and  by  a  telling  report 
from  his  committee,  and  defeated  it  for  the  time  being. 
The  question  then  went  before  the  people  and  the  stay-law 
policy  became  generally  adopted  by  the  Democratic  party. 
When  in  1842  the  proposal  was  again  introduced  Toombs 
*  Journal  of  the  Georgia  House  of  Representatives,  1842,  pp.  446,  447. 


TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER        21 

was  chairman  of  the  judiciary  committee,  to  which  in  ordi 
nary  routine  the  bill  should  have  been  referred.  Hoping  to 
thwart  opposition,  the  Democrats,  who  were  in  majority, 
referred  the  bill  to  a  select  committee  of  three,  from  which 
of  course  Toombs  was  excluded.  This  committee  in  due 
time  endorsed  the  bill  in  a  majority  report  signed  by  the  two 
Democratic  members;  but  Mr.  Echols,  the  Whig  member, 
presented  a  minority  report,  apparently  written  by  Toombs, 
denouncing  the  majority's  views  and  declaring  stay-laws 
to  be  both  unconstitutional  and  inexpedient,  in  that  they 
worked  moral  wrong  by  legalizing  the  violation  of  moral  and 
legal  obligations  and  worked  political  injustice  by  depressing 
one  portion  of  the  community  for  the  benefit  of  another. 
"The  legislature  of  this  or  any  other  state,"  it  concluded, 
"cannot  make  allowances  for  the  miscalculation  or  mis 
fortune  of  its  citizens.  The  great  principles  of  political 
equality,  of  truth  and  eternal  justice,  are  as  much  violated 
by  robbing  the  few  for  the  benefit  of  the  many  as  by  plunder 
ing  the  many  for  the  benefit  of  the  few.  A  good  and  just 
government  will  do  neither  —  an  honest  people  will  oppose 
both/'  *  This  denunciation  was  too  heavy  a  load  for  the 
bill  to  carry.  Toombs  in  defeating  the  proposal  was  follow 
ing  in  the  path  which  William  H.  Crawford  had  blazed  in 
Georgia  nearly  forty  years  before. 

Another  fight  for  responsibility  arose  over  a  railroad  ques 
tion.  In  the  act  of  1836  providing  for  the  building  of  the 
state-owned  Western  and  Atlantic  railroad  from  the  site 
of  the  present  city  of  Atlanta  to  that  of  Chattanooga,  it 
had  been  provided  that  the  Governor  should  subscribe  upon 
certain  conditions  to  one-fourth  of  the  capital  stock  of  any 
companies  which  might  be  established  to  build  railroads 
from  the  Western  and  Atlantic  terminus  to  any  of  the  towns, 
Athens,  Madison,  Milledgeville,  Forsyth,  or  Columbus. 
In  1842  the  Monroe  Railroad  Company,  chartered  to  build 

*  Journal  of  the  Georgia  House  of  Representatives,  1842,  pp.  113,  137. 


22  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

from  Atlanta  to  Forsyth,  fulfilled  the  requirements  and  the 
Governor  made  a  subscription  of  $200,000  on  behalf  of  the 
state  as  by  law  directed,  and  so  notified  the  legislature  in  a 
special  message.  But  the  House,  in  view  of  the  stress  of 
the  times,  refused  by  a  vote  of  100  to  72  to  make  an  appro 
priation  to  carry  out  the  contract.  Whereupon  Toombs 
and  thirty  of  his  colleagues  presented  a  formal  protest  to 
the  effect  that,  without  wishing  to  impugn  the  motives  of 
any  man,  they  believed  that  they  would  be  false  to  their 
principles  did  they  not  record  their  entire  dissent  to  what 
they  regarded  as  a  violation  of  the  plighted  faith  of  the 
state.*  Another  issue  upon  which  Toombs  was  a  vehement 
advocate  of  scrupulous  good  faith  was  that  of  the  Galphin 
claim,  which  will  be  treated  in  a  following  chapter. 

As  regards  the  then  mooted  question  of  completing  the 
Western  and  Atlantic  railroad,  Toombs  held  a  middle  posi 
tion,  favoring  activity  in  construction  in  periods  when  state 
bonds  were  bringing  good  prices,  and  suspension  of  work 
when  credit  was  dear.  As  to  state  aid  to  railroads  projected 
by  private  corporations,  he  seems  to  have  been  neutral. 
He  voted  fora  popular  referendum  on  this  question  in  1837. 
In  the  same  year  he  supported  a  resolution  for  a  plebiscite 
also  upon  the  question  whether  the  state  should  establish 
a  supreme  court.  This  however  does  not  mean  that  he  was 
neutral  upon  the  court  question,  but  that  he  was  trying  to 
appeal  to  the  people  over  the  heads  of  an  obstructive  legis 
lature.  Both  of  these  referendum  resolutions  passed  the 
House,  but  were  killed  in  the  Senate. 

Year  after  year  Toombs  labored  in  behalf  of  the  proposed 
supreme  court  as  a  cap-piece  to  the  judiciary  system  of  the 
state.  Just  after  the  close  of  the  session  of  1842,  for  example, 
he  wrote  to  Stephens:  "The  session  passed  off  well.  We 
succeeded  in  carrying  everything  but  the  Court  —  lost 
that  in  the  Senate  by  three  votes.  When  I  was  in  Milledge- 

*  Journal  of  the  Georgia  House  of  Representatives,  1842,  pp.  276,  277. 


TOOMBS'S  EARLY  CAREER        23 

ville  *  I  thought  its  passage  would  have  injured  the  party 
but  benefitted  the  country;  but  from  the  general  regret 
expressed  at  its  loss  among  the  people  since  we  adjourned, 
I  am  inclined  to  think  it  would  have  been  popular  with  the 
people."  f  In  tne  following  session  the  measure  was  finally 
enacted. 

Of  gallery-playing  resolutions  for  use  in  the  strife  of  the 
national  parties  there  was  very  little  during  Toombs's 
service  in  the  legislature.  In  the  session  of  1838  both  he 
and  Stephens  voted  against  a  resolution  denying  the  con 
stitutionality  of  a  United  States  Bank,  which  was  adopted 
by  90  votes  to  67.  On  a  resolution  denouncing  the  "pet 
bank"  system  of  Van  Buren,  rejected  at  the  same  session 
by  58  to  103,  Toombs  voted  no  while  Stephens  voted  aye. 
Toombs  was  clearly  more  concerned  with  sound  policy  than 
with  party  advantage. 

One  question  only  seems  to  have  arisen  in  the  legislature 
in  these  years  involving  the  sectional  relations  of  slavery; 
and  here  Toombs  forced  the  fighting.  Certain  citizens  of 
Maine  had  taken  slaves  away  from  Savannah  in  their  ship, 
and  when  the  Governor  of  Georgia  demanded  their  extradi 
tion  for  trial  the  Governor  of  Maine  refused  to  deliver  them. 
In  the  session  of  1840  when  a  bill  on  this  subject  was  pend 
ing,  Toombs  introduced  as  a  substitute:  "A  bill  to  protect 
the  slave  property  of  the  people  of  the  state  of  Georgia  from 
the  aggressions  of  the  people  of  the  state  of  Maine,  to  con 
fiscate  the  property  of  citizens  and  inhabitants  of  Maine 
within  the  limits  of  this  state,  and  to  seize  the  person  of  such 
citizens  and  inhabitants  and  other  persons  coming  into  this 
state  from  the  state  of  Maine."  {  The  House,  however, 
and  Toombs  himself,  were  persuaded  against  the  policy  of 
retaliation.  It  enacted  instead  by  a  vote  of  183  to  44,  with 

*  The  capital  of  the  state. 

f  Letter  of  Toombs  to  Stephens,  Jan.  i,  1844. 

t  Journal  of  the  Georgia  House  of  Representatives,  1840,  p.  311. 


24  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Toombs  in  the  affirmative,  that  vessels  from  Maine  should 
in  future  be  searched  at  the  time  of  their  departure  from 
Georgia  ports. 

So  much  for  the  details  of  Toombs's  work  in  the  legisla 
ture.  As  early  as  the  close  of  1839  an  incisive  critic  of  the 
personnel  of  the  House  published  the  following  estimate: 

"  ROBERT  A.  TOOMBS  :  This  member  possesses  high  genius, 
thorough  acquaintance  with  mankind,  and  is  distinguished 
by  physical  and  moral  courage.  Often  eloquent,  always 
sensible  and  convincing,  he  is  a  formidable  adversary  in 
debate.  He  is  a  bold,  fluent,  sarcastic  speaker,  ever  ready, 
ever  fortunate  and  clear  in  illustration.  Frank  and  careless 
in  his  manner,  he  appears  to  be  wholly  indifferent  to  rhetori 
cal  embellishment.  With  infinite  tact  and  sagacity,  with  a 
commanding  talent  for  the  management  of  men,  it  is  with 
himself  to  select  his  own  rank  among  the  rising  men  of  the 
state.  We  have  heard  with  regret  that  he  has  declined 
emphatically  a  place  on  the  congressional  ticket  of  the 
State  Rights  party.  Having  a  handsome  fortune,  we  know 
of  no  gentleman  who  could  so  well  sacrifice  something  to 
the  public,  and  no  one  whom  we  would  contribute  more 
cordially  to  elevate."* 

By  the  time  of  the  congressional  election  of  1844  Toombs 
had  completed  a  record  in  Georgia  legislative  affairs  which 
not  only  advertised  his  talents  but  declared  his  political 
position.  He  stood  conspicuously  as  a  Whig  of  the  Craw 
ford  tradition,  more  devoted  to  soundness  in  policy  than 
to  party  advantage,  concerned  mainly  with  financial  and 
social  questions  and  little  with  constitutional  refinements 
or  abstruse  theories  of  any  sort,  /upholding  state  rights 
merely  as  a  barrier  against  possible  oppression,  moderate 
upon  all  issues  except  where  public  or  private  honor  was 
involved  and  except  where  Southern  institutions  were 
threatened  with  extraneous  interference.  Such  was  Toombs 
when  he  was  eagerly  elected  congressman  in  1844,  and  such 
he  remained  throughout  the  years  of  his  public  service. 
*  Georgia  Journal  (Milledgeville,  Ga.),  Dec.  31,  1839. 


CHAPTER  III 
A  SOUTHERN  WHIG  IN  CONGRESS 

'  I  ^O  understand  the  character  and  policies  of  the  South- 
A     ern  wing  of  the  Whig  party  in   the  eighteen-forties 
it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  condition  of  Southern  society 
and  the  origin  of  the  Whig  coalition.* 

The  negro-slave-plantation  system  created  and  main 
tained  in  the  Southern  community  a  great  special  vested 
interest,  clashing  from  time  to  time  with  the  local  non- 
slaveholding  interest  and  with  the  manufacturing  interests 
in  the  Northern  states.  The  planters  were  always  a  minor 
ity  of  the  voting  population  in  their  several  states  and  in  the 
United  States;  and  for  the  sake  of  security  to  their  regime 
they  were  obliged  to  find  and  retain  allies  in  both  local  and 
national  politics.  They  had  to  check  the  progress  of  theo 
ries  and  policies  disturbing  to  the  established  order;  when 
campaigns  were  impending  against  them  they  had  if  possible 
to  divide  the  opposition;  when  defeat  was  all  but  sure  they 
had  either  to  disarm  their  antagonists  by  soft  words  or  rout 
them  by  counter  attack  as  the  case  might  require.  In 
short  when  once  the  lines  were  drawn,  the  planting  interest 
because  of  its  minority  position  could  be  saved  from  a  steady 
series  of  encroachments  and  defeats  only  by  constant  alert 
ness  and  expert  strategy. 

The  waves  of  Jeffersonian  and  Jacksonian  Democracy 
successively  put  the  conservatives  of  the  South  (the  planters 

*  The  early  pages  of  this  chapter  have  been  adapted  from  the  writer's 
essay  "The  Southern  Whigs,  1834-1854,"  in  the  volume  of  Essays  in  Ameri 
can  History,  dedicated  to  F.  J.  Turner.  N.  Y.,  1910. 


26  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  their  allies)  upon  the  defensive.  Neither  of  these  move 
ments  paid  heed  to  the  peculiar  basis  of  plantation  industry, 
and  each  in  turn  threatened  danger  to  the  fabric.  The 
champions  of  the  established  regime  had  to  support  it 
against  each  of  these  waves,  and  to  use  for  their  purpose 
such  means  and  such  allies  as  could  be  found.  Hence 
the  career  of  the  Southern  Federalists  *  in  Jefferson's  time 
and  the  Southern  Whigs  in  Jackson's. 

When  the  propaganda  of  Jacksonian  Democracy  swept 
the  country  in  the  late  eighteen-twenties  and  early  thirties, 
it  bade  fair  to  destroy  a  variety  of  adjustments  and  to  injure 
a  variety  of  interests.  Its  contempt  for  checks  and  bal 
ances  promised  a  regime  of  government  by  impulse  instead 
of  by  deliberation.  Its  hostility  to  corporations,  capital, 
privileges  and  aristocracy  drove  all  who  were  friendly  to 
these  things,  as  well  as  those  who  were  temperamentally 
conservative,  into  resistance  to  all  that  was  Jacksonian. 
For  the  sake  of  defense  it  was  necessary  to  organize  a 
country-wide  party  of  opposition  with  membership  as  com 
prehensive  as  possible.  All  minor  differences  which  might 
hinder  the  new  coalition  must  be  subordinated,  all  dislike 
of  Jackson  or  his  lieutenants  must  be  fanned,  all  old  con 
troversies  which  might  be  useful  must  be  revived,  all  the 
local  factions  available  must  be  attracted,  and  all  talented 
leaders,  old  and  new,  must  be  enlisted  and  be  given  free 
opportunity  to  make  merit  with  the  people. 

When  in  1834  the  first  steps  were  taken  to  establish  the 
Whig  party,  politics  throughout  the  country  were  highly 
decentralized.  Local  issues  ruled;  and  hardly  anything 
less  than  the  shock  of  the  Jacksonian  surge  could  have 
centralized  politics  and  have  simplified  conditions  into  a 
national  two-party  regime.  The  simplification,  as  we  shall 
see,  was  more  apparent  than  real,  and  each  of  the  parties 

*  U.  B.  Phillips,  "The  South  Carolina  Federalists,"  in  the  American 
Historical  Review,  XIV,  529-543;  731-743;  776-790. 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         27 

was  destined  to  have  chronic  trouble  in  maintaining  its  own 
solidarity.  The  Democracy  was  a  unit  in  Jackson's  day, 
it  is  true,  but  thereafter  it  was  in  frequent  danger  of  split 
ting  asunder.  The  Whig  party  was  from  its  birth  to  its 
death  a  coalition  of  broad-constructionists  mainly  Northern, 
and  state-rights  men  mainly  Southern;  and  the  Southern 
wing  itself  was  heterogeneous  and  at  times  discordant.  The 
party  was  usually  incoherent,  always  beset  with  troubles, 
unable  to  wage  vigorous  campaign  except  by  straddling  upon 
some  and  glossing  over  other  pending  questions  and  appeal 
ing  from  judgment  to  enthusiasm;  and  of  course  it  achieved 
victories  only  at  the  peril  of  dissolution.  Nevertheless  the 
Whigs,  South  and  North,  exerted  strong  influence  upon  their 
times  and  have  left  an  impress  upon  later  generations. 

In  every  Southern  state  old  enough  to  have  begun  to 
emerge  from  frontier  conditions,  there  prevailed  in  this 
period  of  Whig  party  origin  an  alignment  of  local  factions 
opposed  over  local  issues.  In  Kentucky  the  occasion  for 
strife  was  banking  and  debts,  in  Tennessee  taxation,  in 
Georgia  Indian  relations,  and  in  the  Carolinas,  Virginia 
and  Maryland  the  distribution  of  representation  and  the 
building  of  internal  improvements.  Federal  problems  were 
of  active  influence  also,  as  affecting  local  interests,  with  the 
tariff  issue  focussing  in  South  Carolina  and  the  issue  of 
Supreme  Court  jurisdiction  in  Virginia  and  Georgia;  and 
finally  the  development  and  maintenance  of  state  factions 
was  greatly  aided,  particularly  in  Tennessee  and  Georgia, 
by  the  prevalence  of  personal  feuds  and  friendships,  and 
everywhere  by  the  existence  of  more  or  less  definite  class 
distinctions  in  society.  In  most  communities  the  lower 
classes  and  the  factions  controlled  by  them  were  of  course 
the  first  to  join  the  Jacksonian  movement.  But  in  the 
presidential  elections  of  1828  and  1832  when  the  former 
Crawford  following  was  drifting  leaderless,  the  two  oppos 
ing  factions  in  each  of  several  states,  though  supporting  rival 


28  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

slates  of  electors,  endorsed  Jackson  in  common  as  against 
Adams  or  Clay.  This  was  conspicuous  in  Georgia  and  North 
Carolina.  But  before  Van  Buren's  nomination  in  1836 
occasion  had  arisen  for  one  faction  or  the  other  in  each  local 
pair  to  withdraw  from  the  Jackson  alliance.  From  that 
time  onward  there  was  a  permanent  Whig  and  Democratic 
following  in  each  Southern  state.  These  divided  almost 
the  whole  community  between  them,  and  were  quite  evenly 
matched  in  the  several  states,  except  in  Kentucky  which 
was  overwhelmingly  Whig  and  in  the  frontier  states  each  of 
which  invariably  cast  its  first  electoral  vote  for  the  Demo 
cratic  ticket.  Throughout  nearly  all  the  cotton  belt  Whig 
strength  was  concentrated  in  the  plantation  districts,  while 
the  mountains  and  the  pine-barrens  as  well  as  the  frontier 
were  Democratic  strongholds.  In  North  Carolina,  curi 
ously,  the  alignment  was  the  reverse  of  this,  with  the  moun 
taineers  almost  unanimously  Whig  and  the  middle  country 
mainly  Democratic.  In  Virginia  and  Tennessee  the  dis 
tribution  of  Whig  strength  was  determined  partly  by  local 
demands  for  roads  and  canals  and  partly  by  devotion  to 
state-rights  principles,  while  everyone  who  had  no  special 
reason  to  join  the  Whigs  tended  to  be  a  Democrat.  In 
Kentucky  Clay's  personal  influence  was  enough  to  main 
tain  perfect  Whig  ascendency.  In  Louisiana  the  sugar 
planters  desiring  protection  and  the  cotton  planters  oppos 
ing  protection  joined  hands  as  Whigs  —  as  order-loving 
men  of  property  in  fear  of  disturbance  by  a  rabble.  Through 
out  the  country  the  alliances  though  often  incongruous  were 
firmly  cemented  for  something  more  than  a  decade.  By 
1840  the  rank  and  file  were  so  firmly  habituated  to  their 
neighborhood  friendships  and  enmities  that  usually  the 
leaders  themselves  could  not  remodel  the  popular  alignment. 
When  Tyler  and  Wise,  for  example,  went  from  the  Whig 
into  the  Democratic  camp  in  1841-1842,  their  district  con 
tinued  to  give  Whig  majorities;  and  when  between  1847 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         29 

and  1850  Yancey,  Calhoun,  and  Toombs  and  Stephens 
successively  sounded  the  Southern  community  upon  the 
question  of  combining  the  Southern  wings  of  the  two  na 
tional  parties  into  a  single  phalanx  for  sectional  defense,  the 
popular  response  was  decisively  in  favor  of  retaining  the 
two-national-party  regime. 

The  bulk  of  the  Southern  people  throughout  this  period 
tended  to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  state  rights.  This 
inclination  was  in  part  a  traditional  possession  from  the 
times  of  Jefferson,  Madison,  Randolph,  Crawford,  Macon, 
Roane  and  John  Taylor  of  Caroline;  but  it  had  recently 
been  strengthened  by  the  strife  over  the  Creek,  Cherokee, 
and  tariff  issues  and  by  the  studious  consideration  now  being 
given  to  the  rising  slavery  question.  Many  of  the  Demo 
crats  were  now  temporarily  indifferent  to  state  rights,  and 
a  minority  of  the  Southern  Whigs  (the  sugar  producers 
and  the  advocates  of  federal  internal  improvements)  were 
friendly  to  the  use  of  broad  powers  by  the  federal  govern 
ment.  But  the  great  central  body  of  Southern  Whigs,  the 
cotton  producers,  were  state-rights  men  pure  and  simple 
who  joined  the  Whig  coalition  from  a  sense  of  outrage  at 
Jackson's  threat  of  coercing  South  Carolina.  With  Calhoun 
and  Tyler  at  their  head  they  entered  into  alliance  with 
Webster,  Clay  and  the  National  Republicans  as  a  choice 
of  evils,  persuaded  by  Clay's  partial  abandonment  of  his 
"American  System,"  and  deeming  the  alliance  to  be  proba 
bly  but  a  temporary  recourse.  Successive  arbitrary  deeds 
of  Jackson  in  the  middle  thirties  drove  to  the  Whigs  still 
other  politicians  and  constituencies,*  until  by  the  middle 
of  1836  there  was  in  every  Southern  state  a  strong  anti- 
Van  Buren  organization,  and  in  the  election  of  that  year 
the  electoral  vote  of  the  South  was  evenly  divided  between 
Van  Buren  and  the  several  Whig  candidates. 

The  Whigs  when  defeated  in  the  North  in  that  contest 
*  L.  G.  Tyler,  Letters  and  Times  oj  the  Tylers,  I,  604. 


30  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

promptly  realized  that  union  instead  of  alliance  was  a  con 
dition  of  party  success,  and  began  to  organize  for  victory 
in  1840.  But  some  of  the  anti-Van  Buren  allies  when  con 
fronted  with  the  demand  that  they  take  party  pledges, 
revised  their  choice  of  evils  and  marched  back  to  the  Demo 
cratic  camp.  The  Democratic  movement  had  lost  its 
momentum  as  a  rise  of  the  lower  classes,  and  was  no  longer 
to  be  feared  by  conservatives;  and  Van  Buren  was  obviously 
not  an  autocrat.  Calhoun,  dreading  a  revival  of  a  paternal 
istic  programme  by  the  Clay  following,  forsook  the  Whigs  in 
1837-1838  and  by  gradual  stages,  carrying  with  him  the 
majority  of  South  Carolina  voters,  became  fully  identified 
with  the  Democratic  party.  R.  M.  T.  Hunter,  of  Virginia, 
and  three  Georgia  congressmen,  Mark  A.  Cooper,  Walter 
T.  Colquitt,  and  Edward  J.  Black,  followed  Calhoun's 
example  in  1839-1840.  Many  other  Georgia  Whigs  doubt 
less  deliberated  painfully  whether  they  should  adopt  the 
same  course,  before  the  success  of  the  "hurrah  campaign" 
of  1840  gave  them  a  taste  of  victory.  Nearly  thirty  years 
afterward  Stephens  expressed  the  opinion  that  his  entrance 
into  the  Whig  organization  had  been  an  error.*  On  Toombs's 
part  no  such  repentance  is  on  record  and  probably  none  was 
ever  expressed.  His  fondness  for  constructive  and  con 
servative  policies  and  his  moderation  in  everything  not 
concerned  with  probity,  citizens'  rights  and  the  slavery  issue 
probably  caused  his  later  judgment  to  approve  his  course 
with  the  lights  at  the  time  before  him;  and  furthermore  he 
was  never  a  man  for  vain  regrets. 

The  bulk  of  the  Georgia  Whigs  repudiated  the  course  of 
Colquitt,  Cooper  and  Black,  and  after  a  good  deal  of  jockey 
ing  decided  to  stand  firmly  by  the  National  Whig  banner. 
On  June  25,  1839,  the  Southern  Recorder)  of  Milledgeville, 
a  leading  Whig  organ  of  the  state,  announced  that  it  would 
support  for  the  presidency  in  1840  George  M.  Troup,  the 
*  Johnston  and  Browne,  Life  of  Stephens,  p.  140. 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS          31 

veteran  fire-eating  ex-governor  of  Georgia,  whose  name  was 
of  course  one  to  conjure  with  among  state-rights  devotees. 
Other  Whig  journals  endorsed  the  Recorder's  proposal,  while 
the  Democratic  presses  denounced  it  as  a  ruse  to  carry 
Georgia's  vote  for  Clay  in  case  the  election  were  thrown  into 
the  United  States  House  of  Representatives.  In  reply  the 
Recorder,  July  30,  disavowed  such  purpose,  declared  its  desire 
in  good  faith  to  secure  Troup's  election  if  possible,  and  made 
a  counter  charge  that  the  Van  Buren  papers  were  trying 
to  discredit  Troup's  nomination  because  they  knew  that  if 
the  State  Rights  party,  now  commonly  called  Whig,  should 
support  Clay  the  state  would  be  carried  for  Van  Buren. 
The  nomination  of  Harrison  and  Tyler  in  December  by  the 
Whig  national  convention  at  Harrisburg  (in  which  Georgia 
was  not  represented)  ended  Clay's  candidacy  and  relieved 
the  need  for  an  independent  candidate  in  Georgia.  Never 
theless  the  Recorder  continued  to  carry  Troup's  name  .at 
its  "masthead"  until  the  end  of  April,  1840,  devoting 
its  editorials  meanwhile  to  the  censure  of  both  Van  Buren 
and  "  Federalism "  and  incidentally  scolding  Cooper, 
Colquitt  and  Black  for  their  failure  to  rally  to  Troup's 
standard.  Cooper  as  the  spokesman  of  this  trio  issued 
in  April  a  letter  to  his  constituents  pointing  to  Calhoun's 
example  in  support  of  his  policy  and  asserting  that  the 
Democrats  had  now  repudiated  the  Jacksonian  exaggera 
tion  of  federal  powers,  while  the  Whigs  were  to  be  feared 
not  only  because  of  their  nationalistic  leaning  but  also 
because  of  the  presence  within  their  party  of  a  strong  aboli 
tionist  wing  at  the  North.* 

In  the  same  month  a  series  of  Whig  meetings  in  the  state 
showed  such  a  strong  current  for  Harrison  and  Tyler  that 
on  May  5  the  Recorder  withdrew  Troup's  name  and  joined 
the  Harrison  movement.  In  June  Troup  himself  issued  a 
public  letter  from  his  plantation  retirement  expressing  a 
*  Federal  Union,  April  14,  1840. 


32  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

lingering  wish  that  state-rights  men  should  hold  aloof  in 
the  campaign.*  But  the  will  of  the  organization  had  by 
this  time  become  established.  At  Macon,  on  April  n,  a 
Whig  massmeeting  had  discussed  in  its  resolutions  the 
Democratic  charge  that  Harrison  was  an  enemy  to  state 
rights  and  Southern  interests.  "Would  John  Tyler  consent 
to  be  identified  with  such  a  man  on  the  same  ticket?"  the 
resolutions  enquired;  and  in  answer  asserted:  "It  cannot 
for  one  moment  be  believed."  |  On  June  I  and  2  the  "anti- 
Van  Buren"  or  Whig  convention  of  the  state  held  its  session 
at  Milledgeville,  with  John  M.  Berrien  in  the  chair  and 
Robert  Toombs  a  leading  member  on  the  floor,  deliberated 
very  briefly,  endorsed  Harrison  and  Tyler,  nominated  a 
ticket  of  electors  in  their  behalf,  and  adjourned  to  a  nearby 
grove  for  a  barbecue  and  jubilation,  f  Contemporaneously 
a  Georgia  Democrat  wrote  to  a  colleague:  "Two  or  three 
state-rights  men  that  I  know,  and  only  two  or  three,  will 
vote  for  Van  Buren.  It  is  impossible  to  beat  it  into  the 
heads  of  the  Nullifiers  that  Cooper,  Colquitt  and  Black  are 
not  turncoats,  but  sustain  the  same  principles  they  have 
ever  done,  and  those  they  were  sent  there  to  uphold."  § 
Against  the  Harrison-Tyler  movement  further  opposition 
was  in  vain.  The  combination  of  state-rights  protesta 
tions,  denunciations  of  Democratic  irresponsibility,  pleas 
for  sound  policy,  and  Tippecanoe  hurrahs  carried  the  state 
in  November  by  a  large  majority;  and  as  was  usual  in  the 
ante-bellum  period,  as  Georgia  went  so  went  the  nation. 
Among  the  leading  stump  speakers  in  the  state  during  the 
campaign  was  Toombs,  who  not  only  won  many  votes  for 
Harrison  in  eastern  Georgia  but  crossed  the  river  to  break 
a  lance  with  the  redoubtable  McDuffie  at  his  own  home, 
and  came  out  of  the  joint  debate  with  high  credit. 

*  Southern  Banner,  June  12,  1840. 

t  Southern   Recorder,   April   21,    1840.  J  Ibid.,  June  9,  1840. 

§  Letter  of  James  Jackson  to  Howell  Cobb,  June  14,  1840. 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         33 

As  soon  as  Tyler's  troublous  administration  began,  upon 
the  death  of  Harrison,  the  essential  antagonism  between 
the  Whig  elements  became  obvious;  and  the  Georgia  Whigs 
faced  afresh  the  question  of  their  continuance  in  the  coali 
tion.  Their  organization  was  by  this  time  compact,  however, 
and  they  resolved  with  one  accord  to  hold  to  the  alliance. 
The  cotton  belt  was  in  severe  financial  distress  and  anxious 
for  peaceful  politics  and  remedial  measures.  Tyler's  bel 
ligerence  against  Clay's  policies  was  lamented  and  Clay 
was  praised  for  constructive  statesmanship  and  moderation. 
Though  the  Democratic  party  at  large  was  now  appealing 
for  Southern  support  and  professing  friendship  for  Southern 
interests,  the  Georgia  Whig  leaders  found  no  reason  to 
believe  that  this  inclination  was  other  than  opportunist 
and  temporary.  Toombs  and  Stephens  and  their  colleagues 
realized  that  with  the  sectional  issues  once  alive  each 
country-wide  party  must  include  a  Northern  and  a  Southern 
wing,  as  well  as  a  center  mainly  concerned  with  non-sectional 
matters.  With  faith  in  their  own  sound  intentions  and 
their  own  ability  they  assumed  their  share  of  the  burden,  on 
the  one  hand  of  keeping  the  whole  Whig  party  united  and 
on  the  other  of  making  their  party,  as  much  as  they  could, 
respect  and  uphold  the  chief  claims  of  the  South.  They 
were  prepared,  for  example,  to  make  concessions  in  regard 
to  the  tariff  and  a  United  States  Bank  in  order  to  procure 
concessions  in  turn  upon  the  slavery  issue.  Meanwhile 
Clay  rendered  assistance  in  keeping  the  rank  and  file  in 
line  by  touring  across  the  state  in  the  spring  of  1844,  mak 
ing  a  multitude  of  friends  by  his  ingratiating  addresses. 
At  Milledgeville,  for  example,  he  warmly  eulogized  the 
memory  of  William  H.  Crawford  and  in  discussing  the 
presidential  election  of  1824-1825  "he  explained  to  the  sat 
isfaction  of  every  unprejudiced  mind  that  it  was  alone  on 
account  of  Mr.  Crawford's  physical  debility,  his  absolute 
prostration  upon  that  bed  of  death  as  it  was  then  sup- 


34  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

posed,  that  he  came  to  the  determination  to  cast  his  vote  for 
Mr.  Adams."  * 

Turn  we  now  to  affairs  at  Washington.  Among  the  suc 
cessful  candidates  for  the  Twenty-eighth  Congress,  elected 
in  1842  and  taking  their  seats  in  December,  1843,  were  four 
new  members  of  the  House,  all  belonging  to  the  new  genera 
tion  of  Southern-rights  champions  but  each  representing  a 
somewhat  distinct  policy.  William  Lowndes  Yancey  of 
Alabama,  a  Democrat,  uncompromisingly  demanded  every 
possible  concession  to  Southern  interests,  and  within  four 
years  reached  the  conclusion  that  the  case  for  "Southern 
rights"  in  the  Union  was  hopeless,  retired  from  Congress 
and  campaigned  from  time  to  time  thereafter  in  advocacy 
of  Southern  independence.  Howell  Cobb  of  Georgia,  a 
Democrat,  likewise  began  by  making  vigorous  demands  for 
the  promotion  of  Southern  interests,  but  was  willing  to 
accept  compromises  for  the  sake  of  preserving  the  Union. 
Alexander  H.  Stephens  of  Georgia,  a  Whig,  began  by  appeal 
ing  for  moderation  and  mutual  concessions  by  North  and 
South,  but  was  prepared  to  fall  back  upon  extreme  policies 
if  conciliation  should  ultimately  fail  of  its  purpose.  Andrew 
Johnson  of  Tennessee,  a  Democrat,  was  vigorous  to  the 
point  of  vehemence  in  supporting  the  claims  of  the  South, 
but  was  not  disposed  to  countenance  any  extreme  recourse 
in  case  the  decision  of  the  congressional  contest  should  be 
unfavorable. 

At  the  convening  of  the  Twenty-ninth  4phgress  in  Decem 
ber,  1845,  these  men  were  joined  by  Jefferson  Davis  of 
Mississippi,  a  Democrat  more  conciliatory  than  Yancey 
but  less  so  than  Cobb,  and  by  Robert  Toombs  of  Georgia, 
a  Whig  of  about  the  same  attitude  as  Stephens.  Thus 
there  were  thrown  together  in  the  House  in  their  early  prime 
the  whole  group  of  Southern  leaders  who  were  destined  to 
figure  most  actively  in  the  great  crisis  of  the  sixties.  Of 
*  Georgia  Journal,  March  26,  1844. 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS          35 

more  experienced  colleagues  in  the  House  when  they  entered 
it  there  were  of  prominent  Southerners  only  Jacob  Thomp 
son  of  Mississippi,  R.  Barnwell  Rhett  of  South  Carolina 
and  R.  M.  T.  Hunter  of  Virginia,  few  in  number  and  moder 
ate  in  ability.  Coaching  on  sectional  questions  was  easily 
to  be  had,  however,  from  the  veterans  in  the  Senate,  Calhoun, 
Mangum,  Archer,  Berrien,  Walker  and  Crittenden.  As 
Northern  protagonists  in  the  House  there  were  John  Quincy 
Adams  and  Joshua  R.  Giddings,  men  of  experience,  ability 
and  aggressive  sectional  policy,  Truman  Smith,  Preston 
King  and  David  Wilmot,  less  capable  but  equally  aggres 
sive,  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  positive  though  willing  to  con 
ciliate,  and  the  new-coming  Stephen  A.  Douglas  of  untried 
mettle.  The  House  was  accordingly  at  this  time  a  particu 
larly  good  training  ground  for  new  Southern  partisans. 

In  the  Twenty-eighth  Congress  the  House  had  rescinded 
its  famous  twenty-first  rule,  the  "gag  law"  which,  during 
its  eight  years  of  enforcement,  had  enabled  the  anti-slavery 
agitators  to  gain  enormous  advantage  by  connecting  their 
propaganda  with  the  "sacred  right  of  petition."  As  soon 
as  the  gag  was  removed  popular  interest  in  the  right  of 
petition  promptly  died;  but  the  momentum  of  the  agitators 
was  at  once  diverted  toward  the  restriction  of  slaveholding 
territory,  and  here  the  issue  of  Texan  annexation  and  those 
resulting  from  the  Mexican  war  gave  them  large  opportunity. 

Toombs  began  his  service  in  the  House  in  the  midst  of 
the  lull  which  fell  between  the  Annexation  struggle  and  the 
Proviso  strife;  and  he  used  this  opportunity  to  show  his 
inclination  toward  national  in  preference  to  sectional  interests. 
Throughout  his  first  year  in  Congress  he  pursued  uniformly, 
and  in  spite  of  provocations  in  the  latter  portion  which  must 
have  tried  his  patience,  a  course  calculated  to  conciliate 
the  sections  and  to  maintain  the  Whig  party  as  a  Union- 
strengthening  organization.  In  this  first  year,  and  in  the 
second  also,  he  devoted  himself  in  fact  mainly  to  listening, 


36  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  seldom  took  part  in  the  proceedings  except  by  his  votes 
and  a  few  studiously  prepared  set  speeches. 

His  maiden  speech  in  the  House  was  delivered  January 
12,  1846,  on  Oregon.  In  this  he  prefaced  his  remarks  by 
saying  that  he  had  listened  attentively  to  get  knowledge 
of  the  question  from  all  sources.  Then  going  straight  to 
the  heart  of  the  issue,  he  said  there  were  but  two  questions 
to  be  discussed:  I.  What  are  our  rights  to  Oregon;  2.  Is 
it  now  expedient  to  begin  to  assert  them  by  terminating  the 
convention  of  1818.  All  other  questions,  he  said,  were  but 
incidental,  and  members  were  not  warranted  in  exaggerat 
ing  their  importance;  all  speakers  opposed  to  the  proposal, 
and  the  press  as  well,  had  brought  in  the  question  of  peace 
or  war;  this  was  adroit.  He  would  go  far,  he  said,  as  far 
as  any  man,  to  maintain  peace  provided  it  were  an  honor 
able  peace;  but  no  clamors  within  or  without  the  hall  would 
influence  his  decision.  Time  had  been  when  inactivity  was 
masterly;  that  time  was  past.  Viewing  the  problem  as  a 
national,  not  a  sectional  one,  he  believed  the  United  States 
ought  to  end  the  joint  occupancy.  As  to  boundaries,  he 
was  not  sure  our  title  was  unexceptionable  as  far  as  54°  40', 
for  our  title  acquired  from  Spain  was  but  inchoate.  But 
our  title  south  of  the  Columbia  river  and  including  its 
drainage  basin  was  undoubtedly  good;  and  he  endorsed 
the  President's  proposal  of  adjustment  on  the  basis  of  the 
forty-ninth  parallel.  As  to  the  time  for  giving  notice,  he 
saw  no  present  emergency  and  he  favored  the  authorizing 
of  the  President  to  give  notice  at  discretion.  He  expressed 
surprise  that  the  advocates  of  notice  should  object  to  placing 
it  in  the  President's  hands,  since  he  was  constitutionally 
charged  with  the  conduct  of  foreign  relations  and  was  from 
his  own  position  the  best  judge  of  when  and  how  notice 
should  be  given.  It  should  be  given  soon  for  the  sake  of 
defining  boundaries  and  for  the  sake  of  giving  our  settlers 
the  protection  of  our  law.  To  delay  notice,  with  settlers 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         37 

pouring  over  the  mountains,  would  be  to  secure  us  no  rights 
but  to  multiply  our  difficulties.  In  conclusion,  returning 
to  the  topic  of  war,  "  he  viewed  it  as  the  greatest  and  most 
horrible  calamity.  Even  a  war  for  liberty  itself  was  rarely 
compensated  by  the  consequences.  Yet  the  common  judg 
ment  of  mankind  consigned  to  infamy  the  people  who  would 
surrender  their  rights  and  freedom  for  the  sake  of  dishonor 
able  peace.  In  this  matter,  however,  the  question  of  peace 
or  war  did  not  weigh  a  feather;  it  had  nothing  to  do  with  it."  * 
As  a  private  commentary  on  this  speech  Toombs  wrote  to  his 
friend  George  W.  Crawford,  governor  of  Georgia,  February  6: 

"I  do  not  think  a  war  in  the  least  probable.  Mr.  Polk 
never  dreamed  of  any  other  war  than  a  war  upon  the  Whigs. 
.  .  .  The  Democratic  party  had  declared  our  title  to  'all  Ore 
gon*  *  clear  and  unquestionable/  Mr.  Polk  adopted  and 
asserted  the  same  thing  in  his  inaugural  speech.  .  .  .  His  party 
were  already  committed  to  him  to  54°  40',  they  would  stand 
by  him,  and  he  expected  finally  to  be  forced  by  the  British 
Whigs  and  Southern  Calhoun  men  to  compromise;  but  he 
greatly  hoped  that  he  would  not  be  forced  even  to  this  alter 
native  until  he  had  'all  Oregon'  on  every  Democratic  ban 
ner  in  the  Union  for  his  'second  heat*.  .  .  .  Hence  I  urged 
the  Whigs  to  stand  up  and  give  him  the  power  to  give  the 
notice  whenever  he  thought  proper,  which  would  have 
'  blocked  '  him.  But  they  would  save  themselves  and  their 
party  for  the  same  reason  that  the  lad  did  in  scripture  'be 
cause'  their  friends  'had  much  goods.'  Wall  street  howled, 
old  Gales  was  frightened  into  fits  at  the  possibility  of  war, 
and  the  Whig  press  throughout  the  country  screamed  in 
piteous  accents  peace,  peace,  with  the  vain  foolish  hope  of 
gaining  popular  confidence  by  their  very  fears,  and  like  the 
magnetic  needle  they  expected  to  tremble  into  peace.  Noth 
ing  could  be  more  absurd.  If  we  have  peace  they  are  dis 
armed,  and  whatever  may  be  the  terms  of  accommodation 
they  will  be  estopped  from  uttering  a  word  of  complaint. 
If  war  comes,  no  people  were  ever  foolish  enough  to  trust  its 
conduct  to  a  'peace  party'  for  very  good  sufficient  reasons. 
If  the  country  should  be  beaten  and  dishonored,  they  will 

*  Congressional  Globe,  29th.  Cong.,  ist  sess.,  pp.  185,  186. 


38  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

be  called  upon  to  patch  up  a  dishonorable  peace,  but  in  no 
other  event.  There  is  another  view  of  this  question,  purely 
sectional,  which  our  people  don't  seem  to  understand.  Some 
of  our  Southern  papers  seem  to  think  we  are  very  foolish 
to  risk  a  war  to  secure  anti-slave  power.  They  look  only 
at  the  surface  of  things.  If  we  had  control  of  the  govern 
ment  and  could  control  this  question,  I  have  not  the  least 
doubt  that  Calhoun  is  right  in  saying  that  his  *  masterly 
inactivity*  policy  is  the  only  one  which  ever  could  acquire 
'all  Oregon/  It  can  never  be  done  in  any  other  way  except 
to  give  the  notice  and  stand  still,  which  would  effect  the 
same  object  rightfully;  but  notice  and  action  never  will 
acquire  all  Oregon.  Mark  the  prediction.  Notice  will  force 
an  early  settlement.  That  settlement  will  be  upon  or  near  the 
basis  of  49°,  and  therefore  a  loss  of  half  the  country.  Now 
one  of  the  strongest  private  reasons  which  governs  me  is  that 
I  don't  [care]  a  fig  about  any  of  Oregon  and  would  gladly  get 
ridd  of  the  controversy  by  giving  it  all  to  anybody  else  than 
the  British  if  I  could  with  honor.  The  country  is  too  large 
now,  and  I  don't  want  a  foot  of  Oregon  or  an  acre  of  any  other 
country,  especially  without  'niggers/  These  are  some  of  my 
reasons  for  my  course  which  don't  appear  in  print." 

Toombs's  second  speech  in  the  House,  delivered  July  I, 
1846,  was  on  the  tariff.  He  contended  that  the  pending  bill 
supported  by  the  Democratic  majority  was  an  injudicious 
combination  of  protectionist  and  free-trade  items  and  would 
unwisely  curtail  the  revenue  and  hinder  the  government 
in  financing  the  large  expenditures  already  authorized  by 
the  party  in  power.  He  spoke  of  the  existing  tariff"  as  being 
as  good  as  could  have  been  expected  in  view  of  the  turmoil 
prevailing  at  the  time  of  its  enactment  in  1842  and  as  being 
based,  as  he  thought  all  tariffs  ought  to  be,  on  the  considera 
tion  of  revenue  primarily  but  with  reasonable  discrimina 
tions  for  the  protection  of  home  industries.  He  reviewed 
the  general  doctrine  of  free  trade  disapprovingly,  and  ex 
pressed  preference  incidentally  for  specific  as  against  ad 
valorem  duties.*  The  speech,  confined  as  it  was  to  generali- 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  29th.  Cong.,  ist  sess.,  pp.  1030,  1035. 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         39 

ties  and  to  destructive  criticism,  shows  distinct  restraint  on 
Toombs's  part  and  a  leading  purpose  of  promoting  solidar 
ity  in  the  Whig  party.  That  he  was  by  no  means  a  stand- 
pat  protectionist  is  shown  in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  to 
Stephens,  January  24,  1845:  "The  most  foolish  thing  Mr. 
Clay  did  during  the  campaign  was  to  write  that  foolish  letter 
to  Pennsylvania  pleading  his  opposition  to  any  modification 
of  the  tariff  of  1842.  It  is  a  good  law,  but  it  is  not  perfect; 
nor  did  human  ingenuity  ever  make  a  perfect  revenue  law. 
It  never  will." 

Toombs's  next  public  expression  was  an  impromptu  speech 
upon  Mexican  relations.  He  had  doubted  the  constitu 
tionality  of  Texan  annexation  and  dreaded  the  prospect  of 
sectional  wrangling  which  he  foresaw  would  ensue.  After 
studying  the  question  in  the  winter  of  1844-1845  while 
invalided  with  rheumatism,  he  wrote  to  Stephens,  February 
1 6,  in  reference  to  a  speech  which  Stephens  had  delivered  on 
January  25:  "Your  speech  is  a  good  one,  tho'  I  have  rarely 
found  myself  differing  with  you  on  so  many  points.  I 
concur  with  you  in  but  one  of  your  reasons  for  desiring  annex 
ation,  and  that  is  that  it  will  give  power  to  the  slave  states. 
I  firmly  believe  that  in  every  other  respect  it  will  be  an 
unmixed  evil  to  us."  During  1845  Texas  was  formally 
annexed;  and  in  1846  war  with  Mexico  ensued.  In  re 
sponse  to  President  Polk's  request  for  military  appropria 
tions  a  bill  of  supply  was  introduced  and  supported  by  the 
Democrats,  with  a  preamble  asserting  that  the  war  had  been 
begun  by  Mexico.  In  July  Toombs  spoke  denouncing  the 
preamble  as  an  assertion  of  what  no  man  could  rise  in  his 
place  and  say  he  knew  was  true;  and  incidentally  he  cen 
sured  John  H.  Lumpkin,  a  Democrat  from  Georgia,  for 
declaring  that  opposition  to  the  preamble  was  unpatriotic. 
The  true  question,  Toombs  said,  was  not  the  appropriation 
but  the  defense  of  the  President's  policy.  He  himself, 
Toombs  continued,  had  opposed  the  annexation  of  Texas 


40  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

as  long  as  opposition  was  availing;  now  since  it  had  legally 
become  part  of  the  United  States  he  was  ready  to  defend 
it;  the  question  was  merely  where  lay  its  boundary;  the 
joint  resolution  had  provided  that  "so  much  of  the  territory 
as  rightfully  belongs  to  Texas  shall  be  annexed  to  the  United 
States";  the  President  had  cut  this  Gordian  knot  and 
Congress  was  called  upon  to  sanction  the  act.  "No  man 
could  tell  where  the  boundary  was;  it  might  be  fixed  by 
treaty  or  by  the  sword.  If  by  the  latter,  it  should  right 
fully  be  done  by  this  House.  But  the  President,  usurping 
the  power  of  the  House,  had  assumed  to  do  it,  and  this 
House  were  to  be  compelled  to  support  him  or  to  be  de 
nounced  as  wanting  patriotism.  He  did  not  believe  the 
allegation  of  the  preamble;  he  would  not  vote  for  it;  he 
took  the  responsibility;  and  if  his  reputation  was  not  suf 
ficient  to  maintain  itself  against  those  who  chose  to  attack 
it  on  this  ground,  it  was  not  worth  defense."  He  concluded 
by  saying  that  the  Whigs  were  as  ready  as  any  others  to 
vote  all  necessary  supplies  and  take  all  necessary  measures 
to  defend  the  country.* 

On  August  8,  after  the  initial  victories  had  been  won  by 
the  American  forces  in  Mexico,  Polk  in  a  special  message 
asked  for  an  appropriation  for  use  in  negotiating  peace. 
Mr.  McKay,  a  Democrat  from  North  Carolina,  at  once 
introduced  a  bill  to  appropriate  two  million  dollars  for 
defraying  any  extraordinary  expenses  which  might  be  incurred 
in  the  intercourse  of  the  United  States  with  foreign  nations, 
and  he  also  moved  that  all  debate  in  the  committee  of  the 
whole  should  cease  at  two  o'clock,  an  hour  already  close  at 
hand;  and  on  this  he  called  for  the  previous  question.  The 
Whigs  were  at  once  up  in  arms.  Winthrop  moved  to  table 
the  resolution  and  asked  for  the  yeas  and  nays.  The  tabling 
resolution  was  lost  by  68  to  85,  and  the  seconding  of  the 
previous  question  carried  by  82  to  68.  By  this  time  it  was 
*  Congressional  Globe,  29th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  837,  838. 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         41 

already  after  two  o'clock.  Wrangling  now  arose  over  the 
question  whether  it  was  in  order  to  resolve  to  close  debate 
at  an  hour  already  past.  Toombs  and  Howell  Cobb  fell 
into  an  altercation,  and  such  hubbub  arose  in  the  House 
that  the  reporter  could  hear  nothing  but  a  proclamation 
from  Toombs:  "So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  I  intend  to  know 
something  about  the  matter  before  I  vote  for  this  bill." 
As  soon  as  order  was  restored  the  House  defeated  McKay's 
two-o'clock  resolution  and  provided  instead  for  two  hours 
of  debate  in  committee.*  The  episode  indicated  Toombs's 
talent  for  riding  out  a  parliamentary  storm;  but  no  similar 
occasion  arose  during  that  Congress. 

In  the  following  winter  Toombs  made  only  a  single  speech; 
but  the  tenor  of  that  showed  that  the  provocation  of  the 
Wilmot  Proviso  was  breaking  down  his  resolution  to  refrain 
from  sectional  courses.  The  occasion  for  the  speech,  Janu 
ary  8,  1847,  was  the  "ten-regiment  bill"  for  garrisoning  the 
conquests  of  New  Mexico  and  California.  In  opposing  the 
measure  he  reviewed  the  whole  conduct  of  the  war  and 
the  problem  of  slavery  in  the  territories  which  had  been 
precipitated  by  the  introduction  of  Wilmot's  famous  amend 
ment  on  the  stormy  eighth  of  August  preceding.  He  reiter 
ated  his  disapproval  of  the  policy  which  had  led  to  the  war, 
and  censured  the  President's  flagrant  failure  to  support 
Whig  generals  in  the  field  and  his  attempt  at  stifling  criti 
cism  by  impugning  the  patriotism  of  his  critics.  Toombs 
appealed  earnestly  to  his  fellow  Whigs  to  "expose  all  manner 
of  official  delinquency  and  corruption,  suffer  no  detriment  to 
come  upon  any  of  the  securities  of  popular  liberty  and  repub 
lican  government  amid  the  danger  of  arms,  keep  the  country 
always  in  the  right  if  possible,  but  protect  her  in  any  and 
every  event  from  the  foreign  enemy."  Noting  the  Presi 
dent's  statement  that  a  tender  of  peace  had  been  made  to 
Mexico,  Toombs  expressed  doubt  that  it  was  a  proper  offer. 
*  Congressional  Globe,  29th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  1212-1213. 


42  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

He  urged  the  offering  of  an  honorable  peace,  compelling 
Mexico  to  pay  all  debts  but  taking  none  of  her  territory. 
Even  should  an  indemnity  be  demanded  of  her,  which  he 
deprecated,  he  thought  it  should  be  required  in  money,  with 
her  ports  seized  and  revenues  collected  for  the  purpose  if 
necessary,  but  not  an  indemnity  in  land  in  any  event  what 
ever.  The  Mexicans  though  not  brave,  he  said,  were 
obstinate  and  would  stand  a  great  deal  of  beating.  If  they 
should  refuse  a  treaty  we  must  send  fifty  or  a  hundred 
thousand  more  men  and  coerce  them  into  a  treaty;  but  in 
any  case  it  would  be  contrary  to  the  spirit  and  purpose  of  our 
government  to  conquer  a  people  and  bring  them  under  our 
jurisdiction. 

Thus  far  the  speech  was  the  moderate  though  positive 
utterance  of  a  national  Whig,  and  thus  far  it  had  probably 
been  carefully  prepared.  But  before  taking  his  seat  Toombs 
added  an  impromptu  appendix  to  pay  his  respects  to  the 
Wilmot  policy  which  had  been  brought  forward  again  by  Mr. 
Grover  in  a  proposed  amendment  to  the  ten-regiment  bill. 
In  adding  this  appendix  Toombs  changed  his  role  for  the 
time  being  from  Whig  to  Southerner,  from  critic  to  parti 
san,  from  moderate  to  belligerent.  He  said  in  part: 

"The  gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Grover]  asked  how 
the  South  could  complain  of  the  proposed  proviso  to  accom 
pany  the  admission  of  new  territory,  when  the  arrangement 
was  so  perfectly  fair,  and  put  the  North  and  South  upon  a 
footing  of  perfect  equality.  The  North  could  go  there 
without  slaves,  and  so  could  the  South.  Well,  Mr.  T.  would 
try  the  principle  the  other  way.  Suppose  the  territory  to 
be  open  to  all:  then  the  South  could  go  there  and  carry 
slaves  with  them,  and  so  could  the  North.  Would  not 
this  be  just  as  equal?  [Much  laughter.]  Mr.  T.  said  he  would 
not  answer  for  the  strength  of  the  argument;  but  it  was  as 
good  as  what  he  got.  [Laughter.]  The  South  would  remain 
in  the  Union  on  a  ground  of  perfect  equality  with  the  rest 
of  the  Union,  or  they  would  not  stay  at  all.  They  asked 
for  honest  and  honorable  Union;  more  they  did  not  ask  nor 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS          43 

would  they  put  up  with  less.  To  ask  them  to  be  content 
with  a  position  of  inferiority  would  degrade  those  who  made 
such  a  proposition  as  much  as  it  would  those  who  could 
accept  of  it.  ...  The  South  claimed  to  stand  on  an  equal 
platform  with  the  other  states.  This  they  demanded  as  their 
right,  and  they  intended  to  have  it."  * 

The  conflict  of  functions  indicated  in  this  speech  gives 
the  key  to  Toombs's  whole  congressional  career  and  to  the 
tragedy  of  its  failure,  jle  was  the  painstaking  aad  scrupu 
lous  guardian  of  the  whole  country's  honor  and  welfare 
"without  regard  to  section,  and  for  the  sake  of  promoting 
national  harmony  he  was  a  loyal  Whig;  but  whenever 
others  less  national-minded  than  he  precipitated  angry 
sectional  issues  he  was  driven  by  both  reason  and  impulse 
to  uphold  with  might  and  main  what  he  considered  the  essen 
tial  rights  of  the  Southern  people. 

The  appreciation  with  which  Toombs's  talents  and  policies 
had  now  come  to  be  viewed  by  the  public  is  indicated  in  a 
letter  of  Alexander  H.  Stephens  to  his  brother  Linton, 
January  13,  1847,  referring  to  the  speech  of  January  8,  above 
summarized: 

"It  was  decidedly  one  of  the  best  speeches  I  ever  heard 
Toombs  make,  and  I  have  heard  him  make  some  fine  dis 
plays.  It  was  even  superior  to  his  Oregon  speech.  He 
had  fully  prepared  himself,  was  calm  and  slow,  much  more 
systematic  than  usual,  and  in  many  points  was  truly  elo 
quent.  The  House  was  full  and  the  galleries  crowded,  and 
all  ears  were  open  and  all  eyes  upon  him.  He  commanded 
their  entire  and  close  attention  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end,  and  the  effort  has  added  full  fifteen  cubits  to  his  stature 
as  a  statesman  and  a  man  of  talents  in  the  opinion  of  the 
House  and  the  great  men  of  the  nation.  I  was  better  pleased 
with  it  than  with  any  speech  I  have  heard  this  session.  .  .  . 
He  is  destined  to  take  a  very  high  position  here."  f 

*  Congressional  Globe,  29th.  Cong.,  2nd.  sess.,  pp.  140-142. 
f  Johnston  and  Browne,  Life  of  Stephens,  p.  218. 


44  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

The  ensuing  recess  of  Congress  Toombs  employed  as 
usual  in  riding  the  circuit  in  Georgia,  attending  to  the  busi 
ness  of  his  heavy  legal  practise  and  discussing  crops  and 
politics  with  his  fellow-citizens.  Fond  always  of  human 
intercourse  and  proud  of  his  own  fluent  incisiveness,  he  would 
discuss  affairs  with  any  intelligent  person  available.  He 
was  willing  to  listen  but  when  listening  was  prone  to  inter 
rupt  with  comments  of  his  own,  usually  humorous  and 
always  telling.  His  favorite  form  of  discussion,  however, 
was  a  monologue  delivered  by  himself  primarily  to  two  or 
three  Whigs  or  Democrats  who  had  engaged  him  in  con 
versation  and  secondarily  to  a  circle  of  listeners  gathered 
about  that  nucleus  and  eagerly  crowding  in  to  catch  his 
words.  Toombs,  half-spoiled  pet  as  he  was,  rarely  failed 
to  sparkle  in  response  to  such  challenges  of  popular  admi 
ration.  It  was  these  little  occasions,  occurring  in  his  career 
hundreds  upon  hundreds  of  times  in  court-house  yards, 
taverns  and  railroad  coaches  that  fostered  in  Toombs  the 
habit  of  over-prompt  and  over-strong  statement  which  at 
times  marred  his  utterances  in  Congress.  It  was  these 
occasions  also  which  constituted  his  principal  means  of 
keeping  in  touch  with  public  opinion.  Cobb  and  Stephens, 
especially  the  former,  maintained  voluminous  correspond 
ence  with  personal  friends  throughout  the  state,  and  thus 
kept  fingers  constantly  upon  the  public  pulse.  Toombs 
was  too  superbly  self-trustful  to  do  this;  but  devoted  him 
self  to  the  study  of  public  documents  with  an  assiduity 
which  was  the  despair  of  his  colleagues.  In  a  discussion 
in  the  House,  March  16,  1848,  for  instance,  on  a  bill  for 
revising  the  system  of  handling  the  revenue,  a  member  had 
spoken  of  the  difficulty  of  learning  the  state  of  the  finances 
from  the  intricate  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 
Toombs  replied  regarding  this  complaint  and  the  bill  itself: 
"Much  of  the  difficulty  arises  from  the  inattention  of  gentle 
men  and  in  consequence  of  their  not  taking  the  trouble  to 


A    SOUTHERN    WHIG    IN    CONGRESS         45 

ascertain  the  facts  in  connection  with  the  revenue  of  the 
country.  The  question  should  be  examined  and  reported 
upon  by  a  committee.  It  was  too  large  a  question  to  be 
decided  upon  by  the  House  without  such  preparatory 
examination."  Mr.  Hudson  of  Massachusetts  who  followed 
Toombs  "concurred  in  many  of  the  remarks  which  had  fallen 
from  the  member  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means 
[Mr.  Toombs].  .  .  .  Now  he  [Mr.  H.]  admitted  that  gentle 
man's  industry  and  great  power  of  endurance,  but  he  con 
fessed  that  for  himself  the  task  was  not  so  easy;  and  the 
gentleman  from  North  Carolina  [Mr.  McKay],  familiar  as 
he  had  long  been  with  the  subject,  had  likewise  confessed 
how  difficult  he  found  it  fully  to  understand  all  the  Secre 
tary's  report." 

In  his  third  year  in  Congress,  Toombs,  ripened  by  his 
study  of  affairs  and  with  influence  assured  by  the  recog 
nition  of  constituents  and  colleagues,  subordinated  both 
sectional  and  party  interests  throughout  the  long  session 
to  a  non-partisan  advocacy  of  sound  policy,  mainly  in  regard 
to  finance.  Early  in  the  session,  it  is  true,  he  introduced  a 
Whig  resolution  on  the  war,  without  debating  it:  "Resolved, 
That  neither  the  honor  nor  the  interest  of  this  Republic 
demands  the  dismemberment  of  Mexico  or  the  annexation 
of  any  portion  of  her  territory  to  the  United  States  as  an 
indispensable  condition  to  the  restoration  of  peace,"  *  and 
a  few  weeks  before  adjournment  he  made  a  Whig  speech 
on  the  presidential  campaign  then  in  progress;  but  his  prin 
cipal  work  in  the  House  was  as  an  advocate  of  frugality, 
moderation  and  propriety.  On  March  17,  for  instance,  he 
opposed  a  bill  for  printing  90,000  copies  of  the  patent-office 
report,  saying  that  regardless  of  the  question  of  its  value 
for  the  farmers  the  government  ought  not  to  publish  such 
material:  "It  was  a  violation  of  sound  principle  and  a 
betrayal  of  their  public  trust.  They  were  not  authorized 

*  Congressional  Globe,  301!:.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  61  (Dec.  21,  1847). 


46  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

to  put  their  hands  in  the  public  treasury  and  seize  the  money 
for  applying  it  to  objects  that  came  not  legitimately  within 
their  powers  and  duties."  *  On  August  4  he  opposed  the 
maintenance  of  a  large  army,  saying  that  Mr.  Gentry  had 
just  "talked  of  needing  fifteen  regiments  to  keep  New 
Mexico  and  California  quiet  when  we  had  just  conquered 
them  with  three."  Five  thousand  men  he  thought  would 
be  adequate  for  every  purpose  as  a  peace  establishment. 
The  Adjutant-General  had  estimated  for  eleven  thousand, 
but  "military  officers  were  always  extravagant  in  their 
notions  and  their  requisitions."  On  August  n  he  ree'n- 
tered  the  debate.  "He  argued  that  a  less  number  of  men 
was  needed,  since  the  power  of  concentrating  them  on  any 
desired  point  had  been  so  greatly  increased.  Orders  were 
now  communicated  by  lightning  and  the  men  brought  to 
gether  by  steam.  He  dwelt  on  the  cost  of  this  government 
in  a  time  of  peace,  which  he  estimated  at  thirty  millions,  — 
more  than  any  government  on  earth  was  worth.  Extravagant 
public  expenditure  was  the  road  to  ruin  on  which  many  gov 
ernments  of  the  Old  World  had  travelled  to  their  destruc 
tion.  .  .  .  Mr.  T.,"  continues  the  reporter  in  his  medley  of 
indirect  quotation  and  summary,  "dwelt  on  the  evils  of 
executive  patronage,  and  contended  that  it  ought  to  be  cut 
down,  and  as  one  means  of  doing  this  he  was  for  reducing 
the  size  of  the  army.  ...  He  insisted  that  our  frontier  had 
not  been  much  increased.  He  denied  that  any  numerous  force 
was  needed  to  garrison  the  posts  at  home  or  take  care  of  the 
public  property  there;  and  then  he  advanced  his  ultra  ground, 
as  on  a  former  occasion,  that  we  needed  no  army,  not  a  man. 
The  people  were  all-sufficient  for  the  defence  of  the  country. 
He  was  willing  to  keep  up  a  strong  navy,  but  he  believed 
an  army  wholly  unnecessary."  Again  on  August  12,  com 
menting  upon  the  report  of  the  committee  of  conference 
upon  the  civil  and  diplomatic  appropriation  bill,  he  "charged 
*  Congressional  Globe,  3Oth.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  481,  482. 


A   SOUTHERN   WHIG   IN   CONGRESS         47 

them  with  having  capitulated  to  the  Senate  at  every  point. 
He  spoke  of  the  question  of  members'  mileage,  and  the  reduc 
tion  of  the  salaries  of  officers  in  the  executive  departments 
and  some  others,  and  he  said  he  trusted  there  would  be  a 
burst  of  indignation  from  the  country  on  account  of  this 
yielding  of  salutary  measures  of  reform."  * 

His  views  upon  proprieties  in  congressional  relations  and 
procedure  were  expressed  in  equally  positive  manner.  In 
April  rumors  were  mentioned  in  the  House  of  threatened 
mob  violence  toward  certain  abolitionist  congressmen  as 
punishment  for  incendiary  utterances  made  by  them  in 
debate,  and  a  suggestion  was  made  that  congressional 
privilege  should  be  enlarged  so  as  to  safeguard  members 
against  popular  tumults.  Toombs  opposed  this,  maintain 
ing  that  the  ordinary  immunities  of  citizens  were  adequate 
for  the  purpose,  and  deprecating  any  adoption  of  "the 
libertine  construction  of  privilege  which  for  so  many  cen 
turies  oppressed  the  people  of  Great  Britain."  As  regards 
proprieties  in  debate,  —  on  August  5,  when  Mr.  Thompson 
of  Indiana  inquired  of  Mr.  McClelland  of  Michigan  whether 
an  amendment  proposed  by  the  latter  to  the  river  and  harbor 
bill  would  not  if  adopted  cause  the  bill  to  be  vetoed,  Toombs 
"with  much  warmth  called  Mr.  Thompson  to  order  for  his 
reference  to  the  probable  action  of  the  executive.  It  was 
unparliamentary  and  highly  improper.  He  hoped  never 
to  hear  any  reference  made  in  that  Hall  of  Representatives 
to  the  opinions  of  the  President  or  to  any  action  of  his  bearing 
on  the  legislation  of  that  House."  f  While  occasionally 
brusque  in  speech  and  impatient  of  peccadilloes,  Toombs 
was  careful  to  preserve  the  dignity  of  the  House  and  earnest 
in  maintaining  the  established  rules  in  all  ordinary  affairs. 
He  said  very  truly  some  years  later:  "I  follow  regular  order 
as  long  as  it  will  meet  justice;  but  when  it  does  not  I  go 

*  Congressional  Globe,  3Qth.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  1037,  1063,  1070. 
t  Ibid.,  pp.  655,  1042. 


48  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

outside  it  with  great  facility";    and  this  applied  to  general 
policy  as  well  as  to  House  routine. 

In  the  course  of  the  year  1848  Toombs  was  forced  to 
realize  that  it  was  becoming  increasingly  difficult  to  continue 
as  a  Southern  champion  and  at  the  same  time  a  Whig  in 
regular  standing.  In  the  hope  of  preventing  the  impending 
sectional  splitting  of  the  party  he  labored  in  the  spring  for 
Taylor's  nomination  as  an  uncommitted  patriot;  in  the 
summer  he  made  a  speech  in  the  House  censuring  Cass  and 
the  Democratic  platform,  praising  Taylor,  and  appealing 
for  constitutional  observance  in  territorial  policy;  *  in  the 
fall  he  canvassed  and  carried  Georgia  for  the  Taylor  ticket; 
and  in  the  winter  he  strove  to  induce  Congress  to  settle  the 
Proviso  issue  before  Folk's  term  should  expire.  His  purpose 
here  was  to  clear  the  way  for  Whig  harmony  under  Taylor; 
but  Congress,  obdurate  in  its  disagreements,  left  the  fateful 
issue  still  alive.  Finally  in  the  following  summer  and  fall 
he  became  first  apprehensive,  and  then  convinced,  that 
Taylor  was  a  supporter  of  the  Wilmot  policy.  Baffled  in 
his  labors  for  peace,  Toombs  was  thus  driven  when  the  new 
Congress  met  in  December,  1849,  to  relinquish  his  Whig 
regularity,  at  least  for  a  period,  and  concentrate  all  his 
efforts  upon  the  safeguarding  of  Southern  rights. 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  3Oth.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  841-846. 
Speech  of  Toombs,  July  I,  1848. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  PROVISO  CRISIS  AND  THE  COMPROMISE  OF  1850 

IT  is  often  said  that  the  United  States  constitution  estab 
lished  a  government  of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and 
for  the  people;  but  in  the  light  of  experience  it  may  more 
truly  be  said  to  have  provided  the  machinery  for  a  govern 
ment  of  the  people,  by  the  political  majority,  in  behalf  of 
the  interests  which  control  that  majority.  As  soon  as  the 
divergence  of  sectional  interests  and  clash  of  policies  be 
came  patent,  the  politicians  and  the  people  saw  that  the  crux 
of  their  political  strategy  lay  in  controlling  the  majority 
in  Congress.  The  South  and  the  North  were  assigned  in 
the  beginning  an  equal  representation  in  the  Senate,  but 
the  North  was  given  a  preponderance  in  the  House.  As  the 
decades  passed  and  the  tide  of  European  immigration  poured 
into  the  regions  of  wage-earning  industry,  the  North  steadily 
increased  its  House  majority  and  the  slave-employing  South 
was  barely  able  to  maintain  its  equality  in  the  Senate. 
There  was  no  danger  of  the  South  overriding  the  North  by 
congressional  measures,  for  it  was  impossible  for  the  minor 
ity  to  enact  legislation  against  the  will  of  the  majority; 
but  there  was  a  lively  prospect  of  the  North  becoming 
able  and  quite  possibly  willing  to  inflict  its  preferences  upon 
the  dissenting  South.  Among  the  Southern  politicians  and 
people  it  became  a  pressing  and  later  a  desperate  problem  to 
find  means  to  maintain  or  restore  the  sectional  balance  and 
safeguard  their  interests  against  threatened  and  perhaps 
irremediable  disturbance.  Senatorial  representation  accord 
ingly  became  a  vital  issue  between  the  sections.  All  matters 


50  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

of  social  and  industrial  adjustment  concerning  the  negroes 
in  the  South,  such  as  fugitive-slave  rendition,  the  circulation 
of  incendiary  propaganda  through  the  mail,  the  control  of 
the  interstate  slave  trade  and  the  slave  trade  and  slavery  in 
the  District  of  Columbia,  and  in  final  analysis  the  abolition 
of  slavery  itself,  the  enfranchisement  of  the  negroes  and  the 
spoliation  of  the  Southern  community,  all  depended  for 
determination  upon  the  sectional  control  of  the  Senate.  The 
issue  of  slavery  extension  into  the  territories  obtained  its 
crucial  importance  because  upon  it  depended  the  main 
taining  or  upsetting  of  the  senatorial  balance.  All  this  was 
plainly  seen  by  clear-sighted  Southerners  in  the  forties,  and 
the  prospect  was  convincingly  set  forth  both  in  pamphlet 
literature  *  and  in  the  prophetic  memorial  drawn  up  by 
Calhoun  and  issued  over  the  signatures  of  a  large  number  of 
Southern  Senators  and  Congressmen  in  1849.!  It  is  true 
that  nearly  all  of  the  anti-slavery  men  in  Congress  in  this 
period  denied  that  their  purpose  went  further  than  the 
suppression  of  the  interstate  slave  trade  and  of  slavery  in 
the  District  and  the  exclusion  of  it  from  the  territories. 
The  Southerners,  however,  had  no  sufficient  reason  for 
taking  these  protestations  at  their  face  value  or  for  believ 
ing  that  even  if  the  disavowals  were  true  the  same  men  and 
their  successors  would  not  advance  to  more  radical,  root- 
and-branch  policies  after  they  had  won  these  preliminary 
battles.  That  the  constitutional  scruples  of  the  ardent  Free- 
soilers  were  weak  and  those  of  the  abolitionists  were  nil 
the  Southerners  well  knew.  It  was  not  until  1855  that 
Tappan,  Goodell,  Gerritt  Smith,  Frederick  Douglass  and 
their  colleagues  in  their  Syracuse  Convention  adopted  a 
platform  for  the  Liberty  party  proclaiming  "the  right  and 
duty  to  wield  the  political  power  of  the  nation  for  the 

*  See  the  writer's  essay  "The  Economic  and  Political  Essays  of  the 
Ante-bellum  South,"  in  The  South  in  the  Building  of  the  Nation,  Richmond, 
Va.,  1909,  VII,  196-198.  f  Calhoun's  Works,  VI,  310,  311. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  51 

overthrow  of  every  part  and  parcel  of  American  slavery." 
But  the  trend  in  this  direction  was  already  palpable  ten 
years  earlier;  and  the  Southern  leaders  would  have  had  no 
occasion  for  surprise  had  a  large  and  influential  convention 
met  during  the  forties  and  declared  as  did  the  one  in  1855: 
"We  believe  slaveholding  to  be  an  unsurpassed  crime,  and 
we  hold  it  to  be  the  sacred  duty  of  civil  government  to 
suppress  crime.  .  .  .  We  consent  to  no  dissolution  [of  the 
Union]  which  would  leave  the  slave  in  his  chains.  .  .  .  The 
ground  which  we  occupy  is  to  us  holy  ground;  the  ground  of 
the  true  and  of  the  right,  .  .  .  marked  out  by  the  divine 
law  of  loving  our  neighbors  as  ourselves.  .  .  .  We  call  on 
all  the  friends  of  pure  religion  and  of  our  common  country 
to  come  to  the  rescue  and  to  cast  in  their  lot  with  us  in  this 
great  struggle.  .  .  .  We  are  resolved  to  go  forward."  Nor 
would  it  have  been  surprising  if  such  a  convention  in  the 
forties  had  advanced  the  constitutional  doctrines  which  this 
one  did:  that  slavery  is  an  attainder  because  it  imposes 
disabilities  upon  the  child  on  account  of  the  condition  of 
the  parent;  that  the  federal  constitution  forbids  bills  of 
attainder;  therefore  the  maintenance  of  slavery  is  uncon 
stitutional; —  and  again,  that  Congress  is  fully  empowered 
to  abolish  slavery  in  the  states  by  virtue  of  the  general 
welfare  clause  in  the  Constitution.* 

It  was  against  the  rise  to  power  by  a  party  with  policies 
like  these  that  Toombs  and  his  colleagues  had  to  contend. 
The  alternative  policies  available  for  their  purpose  were: 

I.  They  might  concede  that  the  racial  adjustments  in 
the  slaveholding  states  needed  drastic  change,  and  bespeak 
advice  and  assistance  from  the  North  in  its  accomplishment. 
This  policy  was  generally  considered  inexpedient  in  view  of 
abolitionist  and  anti-slavery  intolerance.  The  Liberator  as 

*  Proceedings  of  the  Convention  of  the  Radical  Political  Abolitionists  held 
at  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  June  26th,  27th  and  28th,  1855.  (Copy  in  the  library  of 
the  Wisconsin  Historical  Society.)  The  italics  are  those  of  the  original. 


52  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

early  as  its  issue  of  December  31,  1831,  for  instance,  had 
approvingly  reprinted  from  the  writings  of  the  Rev.  George 
Bourne:  "The  system  is  so  entirely  corrupt  that  it  admits 
of  no  cure  but  by  a  total  and  immediate  abolition.  For  a 
gradual  emancipation  is  a  virtual  admission  of  the  right,  and 
establishes  the  rectitude  of  the  practice.  If  it  be  just  for 
one  moment  it  is  hallowed  forever;  and  if  it  be  inequitable 
not  a  day  should  it  be  tolerated."  For  the  Southern  com 
munity  to  have  conceded  that  its  regime  needed  extensive 
remodeling  would  have  been  to  give  its  radical  enemies  a 
leverage  which  its  leaders  thought  could  be  ill  afforded.  It 
was  hard  to  find  a  middle  ground  here.  Toombs  went  as 
far  as  any  of  the  Southern-rights  group  in  conceding  the 
imperfections  in  the  Southern  regime,  but  he  was  far  from 
welcoming  proposals  for  upheaval. 

2.  They  might  plead  for  national  harmony  and  the  right 
of  local  self-government  and  hinder  the  rise  of  such  issues  as 
should  seem  likely  to  foster  sectional  antagonisms.     In  this 
regard  Toombs  opposed  Texan  annexation,  which  Calhoun, 
Stephens  and  Cobb  supported,  and  opposed  the  Mexican  War 
and  the  acquisition  of  New  Mexico  and  California,  which  Cal 
houn  and  Stephens  likewise  opposed,  but  which  Cobb  and 
the  great  bulk  of  the  Southern  Democrats  endorsed. 

3.  They  might  instead  of  the  policy  of  avoidance  adopt 
a  resolution  not  only  to  repel  the  attacks  upon  the  out 
works  of  the  Southern  position  but  to  throw  its  assailants 
upon  the  defensive  by  counter  attacks.     The  followers  of 
this  programme  denounced  the   Punic  faith  of  the  North 
in  repudiating  its  obligations  to  render  fugitive  slaves  while 
clutching   fast   all   those   advantages   in   the   constitutional 
bargain  which  had  been  granted  by  the  South  as  reciprocal 
considerations.     Another  feature  of  the  programme  was  that 
of  replying  to  the  Wilmot  Proviso  by  demanding  as  a  con 
stitutional  right  the  opening  of  all  the  common  territories 
on  equal  terms  to  slaveholding  and  non-slaveholding  settlers. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  53 

4.  They  might  despair  of  safeguarding  Southern  interests 
within  the  Union  and  adopt  the  policy  of  establishing  a 
separate  Southern  nationality.  The  advocates  of  this 
urged  that  the  "issue  be  courted"  and  the  climax  be  speeded; 
for  they  were  aware  that  the  lapse  of  years  would  diminish 
the  relative  strength  of  the  South  and  lessen  her  chances 
of  success  in  case  a  war  should  prove  necessary  in  the  vin 
dication  of  her  independence.  Rhett  and  Seabrook  of  South 
Carolina,  Yancey  of  Alabama,  and  Quitman  of  Mississippi 
were  the  leading  advocates  of  this  policy  in  the  period  about 
1850;  but  Georgians  were  not  lacking  in  its  support.  Henry 
L.  Benning,  for  instance,  wrote  to  his  friend  Howell  Cobb, 
July  i,  1849: 

"  It  is  apparent,  horribly  apparent  that  the  slavery  ques 
tion  rides  insolently  over  every  other  everywhere.  ...  It 
is  not  less  manifest  that  the  wThole  North  is  becoming  ultra 
anti-slavery  and  the  whole  South  ultra  pro-slavery.  .  .  . 
It  can  be  but  a  little  time  .  .  .  before,  owing  to  the  causes 
now  at  work,  the  North  and  the  South  must  stand  face  to 
face  in  hostile  attitude.  What  I  would  have  you  consider 
is  this:  is  it  not  better  voluntarily  to  take  at  once  a  position, 
however  extreme,  which  you  know  you  must  and  will  some 
time  take,  than  to  take  it  by  degrees  and  as  it  were  by  com 
pulsion?  ...  I  think  .  .  .  that  the  only  safety  of  the 
South  from  abolition  universal  is  to  be  found  in  an  early 
dissolution  of  the  Union.  I  think  that  the  Union  by  its 
natural  and  ordinary  working  is  giving  anti-slavery-ism  such 
a  preponderance  in  the  Genl.  Government,  both  by  adding 
to  the  number  of  free  states  and  diminishing  the  number 
of  slave,  that  it  (anti-slavery-ism)  will  be  able  soon  to  abolish 
slavery  by  act  of  Congress  and  then  to  execute  the  law.  I 
no  more  doubt  that  the  North  will  abolish  slavery  the  very 
first  moment  it  feels  itself  able  to  do  so  without  too  much 
cost,  than  I  doubt  my  existence." 

As  to  the  first  of  the  four  policies  above  listed,  that  of 
submission  to  radical  proposals  for  social  and  industrial 
revolution,  advocacy  of  it  was  not  tolerated  in  the  Southern 
community.  Witness  the  thorough  repudiation  of  Birney 


54  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

in  the  thirties  and  of  Helper  in  the  fifties.  Toombs  appears 
never  to  have  contemplated  such  a  programme  except  with 
scorn.  The  second  policy,  that  of  avoiding  sectional  friction 
and  maintaining  an  attitude  of  conciliation  with  an  under 
tone  of  firmness,  was  followed  by  Toombs  in  Congress  until 
well  into  the  Proviso  struggle.  He  adopted  the  third  policy 
described,  that  of  aggressive  defense,  in  1849  after  his  con 
ciliatory  efforts  had  been  foiled;  and  from  that  time  for 
ward  he  held  in  favor  the  fourth  policy,  secession,  as  an 
ultimate  recourse  in  case  he  should  become  convinced  that 
all  other  means  of  preventing  Southern  oppression  would 
prove  of  no  avail.  The  ebb  and  flow  of  sectional  strife 
between  1849  and  1861  caused  Toombs  as  well  as  many  of 
his  colleagues  to  oscillate  between  the  two  policies  of  strug 
gling  on  in  spite  of  odds  within  the  Union  and  of  cutting 
the  Gordian  knot  by  a  stroke  for  Southern  independence, 
Yancey,  Rhett  and  Quitman  were  consistent  advocates  of 
the  latter  policy,  and  Clay,  Crittenden,  Benton,  Brownlow 
and  Botts  of  the  former;  but  Calhoun,  Toombs,  Stephens, 
Cobb,  Clingman,  Holden,  Hunter,  Foote,  Davis,  Soule 
and  most  other  Southern  leaders  found  it  very  hard  to  reach 
a  positive  choice.  Several  of  them  in  fact  made  more  than 
one  shift  of  position,  their  inclination  toward  Southern 
independence  waxing  with  the  waxing  of  Southern  dangers 
and  waning  with  the  returning  prospect  of  inter-sectional 
peace. 

As  an  aggressive  defender  of  the  South  Toombs  never  had 
much  to  say  directly  about  the  slave  trade  in  the  District 
of  Columbia  nor  about  the  rendition  of  fugitive  slaves.  To 
him  these  appear  to  have  been  uncongenial  subjects.  But 
in  the  chief  outwork  of  the  pro-slavery  citadel,  that  of  South 
ern  rights  in  the  territories,  he  was  Calhoun's  successor  as 
the  captain  of  the  garrison.  Even  here,  however,  he  strove 
for  what  he,  like  Calhoun  and  Webster,  was  conscious  would 
be  but  a  tactical  victory.  He  realized  that  the  region  of 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  55 

New  Mexico  and  Utah  was  entirely  unfit  for  plantation 
industry  and  that  slaveholders  would  never  migrate  thither 
in  appreciable  numbers.  He  openly  conceded  this,  thereby 
laying  himself  open  to  criticism  by  Southern  politicians  and 
editors  less  frank  than  himself.*  Nevertheless  he  fought 
the  Wilmot  policy  with  might  and  main,  believing  that  its 
triumph  would  so  stimulate  the  Northern  radicals  as  to 
make  the  situation  of  the  South  in  the  Union  unbearable. 

The  famous  Wilmot  Proviso  to  prohibit  slavery  in  the 
territory  recently  acquired  from  Mexico  was  introduced  for 
the  first  time,  as  we  have  seen,  on  August  8,  1846.  It  was 
quickly  passed  by  the  House  in  spite  of  the  nearly  solid  vote 
of  the  Southern  members  against  it;  but  in  the  Senate  it 
did  not  reach  a  vote  before  the  adjournment  of  the  session. 
On  February  I,  1847,  Mr.  Wilmot  moved  again  to  attach 
his  Proviso  to  the  same  bill,  now  pending  afresh,  to  appro 
priate  three  million  dollars  for  use  in  negotiations  for  peace 
with  Mexico.  On  February  15  it  passed  the  House  with  a 
smaller  majority  than  before,  overriding  the  now  solid 
Southern  opposition;  but  in  the  Senate  the  bill  was  stripped 
of  the  amendment  and  returned  to  the  House,  where  the 
elimination  of  the  Proviso  was  concurred  in  and  the  appro 
priation  bill  passed.  The  issue  was  renewed  however  in 
another  form  next  year,  and  the  "Proviso  question"  was 
kept  active  until  the  late  summer  of  1850.  On  January 
10,  1848,  Mr.  Douglas  presented  in  the  Senate  a  bill  for  the 
territorial  organization  of  Oregon  on  the  basis  of  popular 
control  of  territorial  institutions;  but  on  May  21  Mr.  Hale 
of  New  Hampshire  moved  to  amend  the  bill  by  a  provision 
excluding  slavery.  This  precipitated  a  hot  debate  in  which 
Calhoun  and  Jefferson  Davis  took  the  ground  previously 
held  by  Rhett,  that  neither  Congress  nor  the  inhabitants 
of  a  territory  had  constitutional  power  to  exclude  slavery 
from  a  territory;  and  on  June  23  Davis  offered  a  substitute 
*  E.g.  New  Orleans  Bee,  Dec.  16,  1848. 


56  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

amendment  providing  that  nothing  in  the  bill  should  be 
construed  as  authorizing  the  prohibition  of  slavery  in  Oregon 
so  long  as  it  should  continue  under  territorial  government. 
This  crystallized  the  issue  as  between  the  Provisoists  and 
the  Southern  aggressive  defenders.  Toombs,  as  we  have 
seen  in  the  preceding  chapter,  was  still  trying  unavailingly 
to  keep  the  issue  from  becoming  critical.  The  problem  of 
New  Mexico  and  California  was  now  added  to  that  of  Oregon 
by  a  presidential  message  urging  their  speedy  organization 
as  territories;  and  on  July  12  the  question  of  the  three 
territories  together  was  referred  by  the  Senate  at  the  instance 
of  Mr.  Clayton  of  Delaware  to  a  select  committee  with 
Clayton  as  chairman.  On  July  18  Clayton  reported  from 
this  committee  a  bill  embodying  what  promptly  leaped 
into  discussion  as  the  Clayton  Compromise.  This  provided 
for  the  organization  of  all  three  of  these  as  territories,  slavery 
to  be  prohibited  in  Oregon  and  the  question  in  New  Mexico 
and  California  to  be  left  for  decision  by  the  courts.  If, 
when  a  test  case  were  presented,  the  courts  of  the  United 
States  should  hold  that  the  institution  of  negro  slavery  was 
a  portion  of  the  public  law  of  the  United  States  extended 
over  the  region  by  the  fact  of  conquest,  slavery  would  thereby 
be  officially  recognized  and  must  be  protected.  If  however 
the  court  decision  should  be  that  the  relation  of  master  and 
slave  was  a  matter  of  private  rather  than  public  law,  then 
the  Mexican  prohibition  of  slavery,  in  the  absence  of  con 
gressional  legislation  to  the  contrary,  must  be  maintained 
as  part  of  the  private  law  of  the  region  undisturbed  by  the 
conquest. 

The  Southern  people  generally  welcomed  the  Clayton 
proposal  as  a  compromise,  and  they  rejoiced  when  it  passed 
the  Senate  on  July  26.  In  the  House,  Stephens  almost 
alone  of  the  Southern  members  opposed  it  and  by  aiding  its 
Northern  opponents  procured  its  defeat  on  the  following 
day,  though  the  bill  for  the  organization  of  Oregon  without 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  57 

slavery  was  soon  afterward  enacted.  In  explanation  of 
this  course  he  afterward  wrote  that  he  believed  the  Clayton 
bill  to  be  even  worse  than  the  Wilmot  Proviso,  in  that  the 
latter  might  be  declared*  unconstitutional  whereas  the 
former  would  invite  the  courts  to  exclude  slavery  beyond 
the  power  of  revocation  so  long  as  the  territorial  regime 
should  continue.*  Toombs  on  the  other  hand  voted  for 
Clayton's  plan  with  a  view  to  patching  up  the  issue.  Never 
theless  he  wrote  to  Andrew  J.  Miller  on  August  25,  shortly 
after  the  adjournment  of  Congress:  "Where  our  rights  are 
clear  our  securities  for  them  should  be  free  from  ambiguity. 
We  ought  never  to  surrender  the  territory  either  directly 
or  covertly  until  it  shall  be  wrested  from  us  as  we  wrested 
it  from  the  Mexicans.  Such  a  surrender  would  degrade 
and  demoralize  our  section  and  disable  us  from  effective 
resistance  to  future  aggression.  It  is  far  better  that  the 
new  acquisition  should  be  the  grave  of  the  Republic  than 
of  the  rights  and  honor  of  the  South;  and  from  the  present 
indications  'to  this  complexion  must  it  come  at  last/"  f 
Although  his  letter  seems  not  to  have  been  printed  at  the 
time,  it  was  quite  possibly  written  for  circulation  in  Georgia 
with  a  view  of  showing  that  no  breach  had  occurred  between 
Toombs  and  Stephens  and  that  the  Southern  Whig  Con 
gressmen  were  not  submissionists.  Though  it  was  foreign 
to  Toombs's  practise  to  confess  himself  in  a  quandary,  he 
was  now  probably  in  serious  doubt  whether  tactical  advan 
tage,  which  was  all  he  considered  to  be  at  issue,  would  be 
best  promoted  by  the  acceptance  or  the  rejection  of  Clay 
ton's  plan.  For  the  time  being,  however,  his  major  interest 
lay  in  the  presidential  campaign,  in  the  shaping  of  which  he 
had  already  had  a  good  deal  to  do. 

*  Letter  of  Stephens,  Aug.  30,  1848,  to  the  editor  of  the  Federal  Union, 
Milledgeville,  Ga.,  published  in  the  Federal  Union,  Sept.  12,  1848;  also 
letter  to  R.  S.  Burch,  June  15,  1855,  in  the  American  Historical  Review,  VIII, 
9I-97-  t  Extract  published  in  the  Federal  Union,  Aug.  26,  1851. 


58  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

In  company  with  many  other  Whigs,  Toombs  had  wearied 
of  Henry  Clay's  perpetual  candidacy.  The  movement 
against  Clay  was  spontaneous  in  widely  separated  parts 
of  the  country.  As  early  as  the  summer  of  1846  Thurlow 
Weed  of  New  York  adopted  as  his  choice  for  the  Whig 
candidacy  Zachary  Taylor,  who  was  then  a  colonel  in  Mexico, 
recently  victorious  at  Resaca  de  la  Palma  and  unconcerned 
with  party  politics;  and  thereafter  Weed  labored  steadily 
for  Taylor's  nomination.*  In  Clay's  own  state  a  strong 
opposition  to  Clay's  candidacy  is  indicated  by  letters  from 
numerous  fellow  Kentuckians  to  J.  J.  Crittenden. f  Toombs 
was  in  intimate  relations  with  Crittenden  and  through  him 
was  in  touch  with  this  Kentucky  movement.  In  a  letter 
to  James  Thomas  of  Sparta,  Ga.,  April  16,  1848,  Toombs 
expressed  his  own  views: 

"  Clay  has  behaved  very  badly  this  winter.  His  ambition 
is  as  fierce  as  at  any  time  of  his  life,  and  he  is  determined  to 
rule  or  ruin  the  party.  He  has  only  power  enough  to  ruin 
it.  Rule  it  he  never  can  again.  .  .  .  The  truth  is  he  has 
sold  himself  body  and  soul  to  the  Northern  Anti-slavery 
Whigs,  and  as  little  as  they  now  think  it,  his  friends  in 
Georgia  will  find  themselves  embarrassed  before  the  cam 
paign  is  half  over.  I  find  myself  a  good  deal  denounced  in 
my  district  for  avowing  my  determination  not  to  vote  for 
him.  It  gives  me  not  the  least  concern.  I  shall  never  be 
traitor  enough  to  the  true  interests  of  my  constituents  to 
gratify  them  in  this  respect.  I  would  rather  offend  than 
betray  them.  .  .  .  The  real  truth  is  Clay  was  put  up  and 
pushed  by  Corwin  and  McLean,  Greeley  and  Co.,  to  break 
down  Taylor  in  the  South.  Having  made  that  use  of  him, 
they  will  toss  him  overboard  at  the  Convention  without 
decent  burial.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  a  third  can 
didate  may  be  brought  forward,  and  Scott  stands  a  good 
chance  to  be  the  man.  For  my  part  I  am  a  Taylor  man 
without  a  second  choice." 

*  Life  of  Thurlow  Weed,  I,  570,  ff. 

t  Originals  in  the  Library  of  Congress,  MSS.  division,  Crittenden 
papers,  —  e.g.  letter  of  J.  B.  Kinkhead,  Frankfort,  Ky.,  Jan.  2,  1847. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  59 

In  the  spring  and  summer  Toombs  aided  in  grooming 
Taylor  for  the  campaign,  glossing  over  his  political  crudities 
with  success,  buoyed  by  the  hope  and  expectation  that 
Taylor  as  President  would  prove  amenable  to  Southern  con 
trol  and  would  thus  relieve  the  Southern  Whigs  from  having 
to  choose  between  loyalty  to  the  Union  and  loyalty  to  the 
South.  No  sooner  had  Toombs  and  Stephens  launched 
themselves  in  August  upon  a  whirlwind  campaign  of  stump 
speaking  in  Georgia  than  Stephens  was  disabled  by  stabs 
received  in  an  affray  with  Judge  Cone  in  Atlanta.  Toombs 
thereupon  redoubled  his  own  efforts  and  carried  the  state 
for  Taylor.  He  then  returned  to  Congress  in  December 
and  found  sectional  trouble  brewing  more  actively  than 
before. 

The  new  feature  now  to  be  dealt  with  was  a  movement 
inaugurated  by  the  Southern  Democrats  in  Congress  to 
break  down  party  alignments  and  establish  a  Southern  block 
in  the  two  houses  for  the  safeguarding  of  Southern  interests. 
As  early  as  August  21,  1847,  Isaac  E.  Holmes,  Congressman 
from  the  Charleston  district  of  South  Carolina,  had  written 
to  Howell  Cobb:  "I  wish  the  Southern  Representatives 
would  consent  to  act  together  without  regard  to  Whig  or 
Democrat.  The  Wilmot  Proviso  is  paramount  to  all  party. 
The  North  is  resolved  to  crush  slavery  —  are  we  equally 
in  the  South  resolved  at  all  hazards  to  defend  it?"  And  on 
July  I  of  the  next  year  W.  C.  Daniell,  a  Democratic  leader  in 
Northern  Georgia,  wrote  Cobb:  "If  the  hostility  to  slavery 
has  become  so  extended  as  to  tempt  Martin  Van  Buren  to 
bow  low  and  worship  at  its  shrine  for  the  highest  office  in 
the  gift  of  the  people,  how  long  will  it  be  before  our  own 
security  will  require  that  we  withdraw  from  those  who 
deem  themselves  contaminated  by  our  touch  ?  And  how  long 
before  we  shall  deem  those  our  best  friends  who  would  tell 
us  that  our  only  dependence  is  upon  ourselves?"  Van 
Buren's  apostasy  to  the  Free-soilers  could  not  but  strengthen 


60  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  suspicion  that  such  other  Northern  Democrats  as  Cass, 
Dallas  and  Buchanan  were  held  to  their  "Southern  prin 
ciples"  only  by  their  desire  for  the  presidential  office;  and 
the  heavy  defections  from  Cass  to  Van  Buren  at  the  polls 
in  November  persuaded  a  multitude  of  Southerners  that 
the  friendship  of  the  Democratic  rank  and  file  at  the  North 
was  no  longer  a  safe  reliance.  Finally  the  occurrence  of 
bitter  debates  in  both  houses  in  December  and  January 
brought  affairs  to  such  a  climax  that  Calhoun  called  a  series 
of  meetings  of  all  the  Southern  Senators  and  Representa 
tives  with  a  view  to  the  issuance  of  a  common  address  to 
the  country  and  the  establishment  of  a  Southern  phalanx 
in  Congress  regardless  of  previous  party  affiliations.  The 
Southern  Whigs  however,  having  just  elected  their  candidate, 
himself  a  Louisiana  slaveholder,  to  the  presidency,  resisted 
this  appeal;  and  Toombs  led  the  resistance.  Along  with 
about  eighty  other  Southern  Whigs  and  Democrats  he 
attended  the  meetings,  but  only  to  denounce  Calhoun's 
proposals  and  to  refuse,  along  with  the  rest  of  the  Whigs, 
to  sign  the  address.  Four  of  the  Democrats  attending  also 
refused  to  sign.  These  four,  Howell  Cobb,  Linn  Boyd, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke  and  John  H.  Lumpkin,  when  scolded  for 
disloyalty,  issued  an  address  of  their  own,  February  26, 
attributing  the  current  evils  to  the  machinations  of  the 
Whigs  and  urging  the  firm  cementing  of  the  national  Demo 
cratic  party  as  the  best  course  for  the  safety  of  the  South. 
f  <•  Toombs's  motive  was  of  course  to  allay  the  sectional 
discord,  patch  up  the  slavery  issue  and  give  Taylor's  incom 
ing  administration  the  best  possible  chance  for  peace  and 
prosperity.  On  January  3,  1849,  he  wrote  to  Crittenden, 
then  serving  as  governor  of  Kentucky: 

"  This  Southern  movement  is  a  bold  strike  to  disorganize 
the  Southern  Whigs  and  either  to  destroy  Genl.  Taylor  in 
advance  or  compel  him  to  throw  himself  in  the  hands  of  a 
large  section  of  the  Democracy  at  the  South.  The  South- 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  6l 

ern  Democracy  are  perfectly  desperate.  Their  Northern  allies 
they  clearly  see  will  unite  with  the  Free-soilers,  and  even  now 
the  peace  is  broken  between  them  forever.  Almost  every  man 
of  the  Southern  Democrats  have  joined  Calhoun's  movement. 
After  mature  consideration  we  concluded  to  go  into  the  meet 
ing  in  order  to  control  and  crush  it;  it  has  been  a  delicate 
business,  but  so  far  we  have  succeeded  well,  and  I  think  will 
be  able  to  overthrow  it  completely  on  the  I5th.  inst." 

Discussing  the  prospects  in  Congress,  Toombs  continued: 
"The  Northern  Whigs  have  receded  on  the  District  of  Colum 
bia  question  and  will  come  square  up  to  safe  ground  on 
slavery  in  the  District.  As  to  the  cursed  'slave  pens,'  we 
will  try  to  trade  them  off  to  advantage.  No  honest  man 
would  regret  their  annihilation  if  done  rightly."  That  is 
to  say,  he  was  ready  to  agree  to  the  abolition  of  the  slave 
trade  in  the  District,  and  hoped  by  that  means  to  dissuade 
the  Northern  Whigs  from  their  purpose  of  abolishing  slavery 
there.  "The  territorial  question,"  he  continued  further, 
"I  think  this  gold  fever  by  drawing  a  large  American  popula 
tion  into  California  will  make  more  easy  to  adjust.  Upon 
the  whole  I  see  nothing  desperate  in  settling  these  legacies 
of  Folk's  administration  unless  we  have  treason  in  our 
ranks.  The  temper  of  the  North  is  good;  and  with  kind 
ness,  and  patronage  skillfully  adjusted,  I  think  we  can  work 
out  of  present  troubles,  preserve  the  Union,  and  disappoint 
bad  men  and  traitors.",* 

On  January  22  Toombs  wrote  Crittenden  again: 

"  We  have  been  in  a  good  deal  of  trouble  here  for  the  last 
month  about  this  slavery  question,  but  I  now  believe  we 
begin  to  see  the  light.  I  came  here  very  anxious  to  settle 
the  slavery  question  before  the  4th.  of  March.  The  longer 
it  remains  on  hand  the  worse  it  gets;  and  I  am  confident 
it  will  be  harder  to  settle  after  than  before  the  4th.  of  March. 

*  This  letter,  the  original  of  which  is  preserved  in  the  Library  of  Con 
gress,  was  absent-mindedly  dated  by  Toombs,  "Dec.  3,  1848."  It  was 
clearly  written  a  month  afterward. 


62  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

We  have  therefore  concluded  to  make  a  decided  effort 
at  it  now.  Preston  will  this  morning  move  to  make  the 
territorial  bills  the  special  order  for  an  early  day,  which 
will  bring  the  subject  before  us.  We  shall  then  attempt 
to  erect  all  of  California  and  that  portion  of  N.  Mexico 
lying  west  of  the  Sierra  Membres  into  a  state  as  soon  as  she 
forms  a  constitution  and  asks  it,  which  we  think  the  present 
state  of  anarchy  there  will  soon  drive  her  to  do.  ...  I  think 
we  can  carry  this  or  something  very  like  it.  The  principle  I 
act  upon  is  this:  It  cannot  be  a  slave  country;  we  have  only 
the  point  of  honor  to  save;  this  will  save  it  and  rescue  the 
country  from  all  danger  from  agitation.  The  Southern  Whigs 
are  now  nearly  unanimous  in  favor  of  it.  ...  If  you  see  any 
objections  to  it,  write  me  immediately,  for  we  will  keep  our 
selves  in  a  situation  to  ease  off  if  it  is  desirable  to  do  so." 

In  the  same  letter  Toombs  continued  his  narrative  con 
cerning  the  movement  for  a  Southern  address: 

"We  have  completely  foiled  Calhoun  in  his  miserable 
attempt  to  form  a  Southern  party.  .  .  .  We  had  a  regular 
flareup  in  the  last  meeting,  and  at  the  call  of  Calhoun  I 
told  them  briefly  what  we  [i.e.  the  Whigs]  were  at.  I  told 
him  that  the  Union  of  the  South  was  neither  possible  nor 
desirable  until  we  were  ready  to  dissolve  the  Union;  that 
we  certainly  did  not  intend  to  advise  the  people  now  to  look 
anywhere  else  than  to  their  own  government  for  the  pre 
vention  of  apprehended  evils;  that  we  did  not  expect  an  admin 
istration  which  we  had  brought  into  power  would  do  any  act 
or  permit  any  act  to  be  done  which  it  would  become  necessary 
for  our  safety  to  rebel  at;  .  .  .  and  that  we  intended  to 
stand  by  the  government  until  it  committed  an  overt  act  of 
aggression  upon  our  rights,  which  neither  we  nor  the  country 
ever  expected.  We  then  by  a  vote  of  42  to  44  voted  to  re 
commit  his  report  (we  had  before  this  tried  to  kill  it  directly 
but  failed).  We  hear  the  committee  have  whittled  it  down 
to  a  weak  milk  and  water  address  to  the  whole  Unjon.  We 
are  opposed  to  any  address  whatever,  but  the  Democrats  will 
probably  outvote  us  tonight  and  put  forth  the  one  reported; 
but  it  will  not  get  more  than  two  or  three  Whig  names."  * 

*  Coleman,  Life  of  Crittenden,  I,  335,  336.  The  address  adopted  that 
night  may  be  found  in  Calhoun's  Works,  VI,  290-313. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  63 

In  a  further  letter  to  Crittenden,  February  9,*  Toombs 
continued  his  hopeful  narrative  of  the  Southern  Whig  plan 
for  the  prompt  settlement  of  the  territorial  issue: 

"Mr.  Preston  made  his  speech  and  proposed  his  bill  on 
Tuesday.  His  speech  was  a  very  good  one  and  its  effect 
very  happy.  We  shall  carry  the  measure  easily  in  the  House. 
It  meets  with  its  bitterest  opposition  from  Calhoun's  tail  and 
Giddings's.  New  England  and  New  York  want  to  hold  off 
until  next  session.  Their  object  is  unmistakably  to  make 
themselves  necessary  to  the  administration]  in  carrying  it, 
and  demanding  terms  for  their  service.  We  shall  bring  them 
in,  I  think,  but  not  if  we  can  carry  it  without  them.  The 
only  difficulty  is  in  the  Senate.  Webster,  Benton  and  Cal- 
houn  and  his  tail  are  its  great  opponents  there.  The  two 
first  have  no  tail,  and  we  are  daily  shortening  that  of  the 
latter.  ...  I  consider  the  question  for  all  practical  purposes 
as  now  settled,  whatever  may  be  its  fate  at  this  session." 

Toombs  was  of  course  too  sanguine.  Preston's  bill, 
drawn  in  the  form  of  an  amendment  to  a  pending  territorial 
bill,  provided  for  the  immediate  erection  of  all  the  vast 
region  acquired  from  Mexico  into  a  single  state  and  its 
admission  into  the  Union  by  the  first  of  the  coming  October. 
Its  purpose,  identical  with  that  of  the  more  famous  Toombs 
bill  of  1856  for  the  admission  of  Kansas,  was  to  stop  the 
quarrel  over  the  territory  by  converting  it  into  a  state, 
empowered  like  other  states  to  determine  its  own  institu 
tions.  On  February  27,  however,  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
a  proviso  was  added  to  Preston's  amendment  by  a  vote  of 
91  to  87  prohibiting  slavery  in  the  proposed  state;  and 
when  just  afterward  the  amendment  was  put  upon  its 
adoption  not  a  single  vote  was  cast  in  its  favor.  Toombs 
took  this  as  a  test  question,  and  at  once  pronounced  his 
conviction  that  the  parting  of  the  ways  had  been  reached. 
"When  this  committee,"  said  he,  "determined  to  put  the 
prohibitory  clause  upon  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
*  Erroneously  dated  Jan.  9  in  the  original. 


64  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

from  Virginia  [Mr.  Preston],  all  chance  of  pacification  was 
at  an  end."  With  his  optimism  dashed,  he  began  to  be 
unwillingly  convinced  that  his  trust  in  the  will  and  power 
of  the  Whig  party  to  preserve  the  Union  on  the  basis  of 
justice  to  the  South  had  been  unwarranted,  and  he  was 
gradually  driven  to  endorse  and  assume  the  leadership  of 
that  movement  to  form  a  Southern  block  which  only  a  few 
weeks  previously  he  had  vehemently  denounced. 

After  losing  his  faith  in  the  congressional  prospect  Toombs 
continued  to  hope  that  the  new  President  would  prove  a 
bulwark  against  Northern  aggressions.  The  legislature  of 
Virginia  adopted  resolutions  of  resistance  at  all  hazards 
against  the  enactment  and  enforcement  of  the  Wilmot 
Proviso,  and  numerous  other  legislatures  and  conventions 
in  the  South  followed  the  example.  Toombs,  however,  held 
his  peace.  Taylor  at  the  time  of  his  inauguration  was  in 
sympathy  with  Toombs's  wish  to  avoid  the  impending  crisis 
by  providing  statehood  instead  of  a  territorial  regime  in  the 
debatable  land;  but  Taylor  applied  the  plan  only  to  the 
California  portion.  He  despatched  Thomas  Butler  King 
to  California  as  an  agent  to  promote  a  state-forming  move 
ment;  and  as  a  result  California  soon  applied  for  admission, 
with  approximately  her  present  boundaries  and  with  a  non- 
slavery  constitution;  but  New  Mexico,  including  Utah, 
remained  with  unchanged  status  as  the  chief  bone  of  con 
tention. 

Meanwhile  the  two  or  three  anti-slavery  Whigs  within 
Taylor's  cabinet,  and  Seward  as  an  outside  adviser,  began 
to  dominate  the  unsophisticated  President's  mind.  Toombs 
now  apologized  for  him  on  the  ground  of  inexperience.  He 
wrote  for  instance  to  Crittenden's  daughter,  Mrs.  Coleman, 
June  22,  1849:  "Genl.  Taylor  is  in  a  new  position,  his  duties 
and  responsibilities  are  vast  and  complicated,  and  besides 
he  is  among  strangers  whose  aims  and  objects  are  not  known 
to  him.  Therefore  that  he  should  commit  mistakes,  even 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  65 

grave  errors,  must  be  expected;  but  I  have  an  abiding  con 
fidence  that  he  is  honest  and  sincere  and  will  repair  them 
when  seen.  If  I  am  mistaken  in  this,  no  man  in  the  nation 
will  more  bitterly  repent  the  events  of  the  last  eighteen 
months  than  I  will,  and  I  think  that  in  that  event  I  shall 
have  made  my  last  presidential  campaign."  In  the  fall 
uncontradicted  reports  began  to  appear  in  the  newspapers 
of  expressions  by  Taylor  declaring  a  sense  of  the  evils  of 
slavery  and  a  hostility  to  its  further  territorial  spread.  This 
caused  such  a  reaction  in  the  South  that  on  the  one  hand 
the  Democrats  carried  virtually  all  of  the  state  elections  and 
on  the  other  hand  the  sentiment  for  aggressive  sectional 
resistance  became  increasingly  widespread  and  outspoken. 
Toombs  was  by  this  time  very  uneasy,  but  still  he  hoped 
that  Taylor  might  be  brought  again  under  Southern  control 
when  Congress  assembled. 

The  state  of  affairs  and  the  ensuing  developments  were 
described  by  Toombs  several  months  afterward  in  a  letter 
to  Crittenden:  * 

"  During  the  last  summer  the  government,  with  the  concur 
rence  of  the  whole  cabinett  except  Crawford,  threw  the  entire 
patronage  of  the  North  in  the  hands  of  Seward  and  his 
party.  This  was  done  under  some  foolish  idea  of  Preston's 
that  they  would  get  rid  of  a  Northern  competition  for  1852, 
as  Seward  stood  for  1856.  The  effect  of  which  was  to  enable 
Seward  to  take  the  entire  control  of  the  New  York  organiza 
tion  and  force  the  whole  Northern  Whig  party  into  the 
extreme  anti-slavery  position  of  Seward,  which  of  course 
sacked  the  South.  I  knew  the  effect  of  this  policy  would 
certainly  destroy  the  Whig  party  and  perhaps  endanger  the 
Union.  When  I  came  to  Washington,  as  I  expected,  I 
found  the  whole  Whig  party  expecting  to  pass  the  Proviso, 
and  that  Taylor  would  not  veto,  and  that  thereby  the  Whig 
party  of  the  North  were  to  be  built  up  at  the  expense  of  the 
Northern  Democracy,  who  from  political  and  party  considera 
tions  had  stood  quasi-opposed  to  the  Proviso.  I  saw  Genl. 

*  April  23,  1850.     See  infra  p.  80,  footnote. 


66  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

T.  and  talked  fully  with  him  upon  the  subject,  and  while  he 
stated  he  had  given  and  would  give  no  pledges  either  way 
about  the  Proviso,  he  gave  me  clearly  to  understand  that  if  it 
was  passed  he  would  sign  it. 

"My  course  became  'instantly  fixed  and  settled.  As  I 
would  not  hesitate  to  oppose  the  Proviso  even  [to]  the  extent 
of  a  dissolution  of  the  Union,  I  could  not  for  a  moment  regard 
any  party  considerations  in  the  treatment  of  the  question. 
I  therefore  determined  to  put  the  test  to  the  Whig  party 
and  abandon  its  organization  upon  its  refusal.  Both  events 
happened.  To  defeat  this  policy  it  was  of  the  first  impor 
tance  to  prevent  the  organization  of  the  House  going  into  the 
hands  of  the  Northern  Whig  party.  I  should  have  gone  to 
any  extent  necessary  to  effect  that  object.  They  foolishly 
did  it  themselves.  Without  fatiguing  you  with  details,  my 
whole  subsequent  course  has  been  governed  by  this  line  of 
policy.  I  have  determined  to  settle  the  question  honorably 
to  my  own  section  if  possible,  at  any  rate  and  every  hazard, 
totally  indifferent  to  what  might  be  its  effect  upon  Genl. 
Taylor  or  his  administration." 

It  was  well  known  that  the  new  House  about  to  assemble 
would  comprise  112  Democrats,  105  Whigs  and  13  Free- 
soilers,  and  that  the  anti-slavery  majority  among  the  Whigs 
if  they  could  bind  the  whole  party  to  the  support  of  one  of 
their  own  number  could  elect  a  Speaker  with  the  aid  of  the 
Free-soil  votes  and  organize  the  House  in  such  a  way  that 
the  Proviso  legislation  could  not  fail  to  pass.  Toombs 
resolved  to  resist  this  plan  with  all  his  might.  At  the  same 
time  he  repelled  the  overtures  that  the  Democrats  made 
for  his  support,  even  though  Howell  Cobb  was  their  nomi 
nee,  in  order  to  preserve  such  chance  as  he  might  have  as  a 
Whig  to  exert  pressure  upon  the  President.  He  attended 
the  Whig  caucus  for  nominating  a  Speaker,  on  the  night  of 
December  I,  and  there  demanded  as  a  condition  of  his  con 
tinued  regularity  as  a  Whig  that  the  caucus  give  assurances 
to  the  Southern  interest  by  adopting  a  resolution  offered 
by  him  to  the  effect  that  Congress  ought  not  to  put  any 
restriction  upon  any  state  institutions  in  the  territories 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  67 

and  ought  not  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  District  of  Colum 
bia.  When  this  was  rejected,  Toombs  bolted  the  caucus, 
followed  by  Stephens  and  Owen  of  Georgia,  Morton  of 
Virginia,  Cabell  of  Florida  and  Hilliard  of  Alabama.  The 
remainder  of  the  caucus  then  nominated  Winthrop  of  Massa 
chusetts. 

When  on  December  3  the  House  met  and  cast  its  first 
ballot  for  Speaker,  103  Democrats  voted  for  Cobb,  96  Whigs 
for  Winthrop,  8  Free-soilers  for  Wilmot,  the  six  bolting 
Whigs  for  Gentry  of  Tennessee,  and  the  remainder  scatter 
ing;  total  221,  with  nine  members  absent.  On  December 
5  after  eleven  more  ballots  had  been  taken  with  virtually 
identical  results,  Andrew  Johnson  moved  a  resolution  for 
election  by  plurality  vote.  This  was  tabled  by  a  huge 
majority.  During  the  next  week  twenty-nine  more  ballots 
were  taken,  with  Potter  of  Ohio  replacing  Cobb  as  the 
recipient  of  the  Democratic  votes  but  with  Winthrop  lead 
ing  with  a  maximum  of  102  votes.  In  a  series  of  ballots 
on  December  n  and  12  the  Democrats  swung  to  W.  J. 
Brown  of  Indiana.  Before  the  last  of  these,  the  fortieth 
ballot,  both  Winthrop  and  Wilmot  withdrew  their  candi 
dacies;  and  on  that  ballot  Brown  received  most  of  the  Free- 
soil  votes  and  would  have  been  elected  had  not  several 
Southern  Democrats  in  suspicion  of  anti-slavery  collusion 
voted  against  him.  Immediately  after  the  ballot  the  air 
ing  of  these  suspicions  brought  out  the  fact  that  Brown  had 
written  to  Wilmot  that  if  elected  he  would  "constitute  the 
committees  on  the  District  of  Columbia,  on  Territories  and 
on  the  Judiciary  in  such  manner  as  shall  be  satisfactory  to 
yourself  and  your  friends."  At  the  same  time  he  had  inti 
mated  in  reply  to  questions  by  Southern  Democrats  that  he 
was  not  giving  pledges  to  the  Free-soilers  and  was  hostile 
to  the  Wilmot  policy.  The  exposure  of  Brown's  duplic 
ity  caused  a  great  furor  in  the  House.  The  excitement 
lasted  for  several  days,  with  charges  of  disunion  intent  made 


68  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

against  some  of  the  Southerners,  and  the  lie  passed  between 
Duer  of  New  York  and  Meade  of  Virginia.  In  the  midst 
of  this  turmoil,  with  a  motion  pending  to  elect  Cobb  Speaker, 
Toombs  delivered,  December  13,  the  first  of  a  series  of 
impromptu  speeches  so  defiant,  with  climaxes  so  brilliant 
and  effective  that,  together  with  his  powerful  set-speech  of 
February  27,  they  gave  him  the  undisputed  leadership  of 
the  aggressive-defense  movement. 

After  a  brief  denunciation  of  the  underhanded  trick  of 
the  Free-soilers  and  an  explanation  of  his  own  refusal  to 
vote  with  the  Northern  Whigs  in  the  speakership  contest, 
he  launched  himself  upon  the  general  question  of  union  and 
disunion: 

"  It  seems  from  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  New 
York  that  we  are  to  be  intimidated  by  eulogies  upon  the 
Union  and  denunciations  of  those  who  are  not  ready  to 
sacrifice  national  honor,  essential  interests  and  constitu 
tional  rights  upon  its  altar.  Sir,  I  have  as  much  attachment 
to  the  Union  of  these  states,  under  the  Constitution  of  our 
fathers,  as  any  freeman  ought  to  have.  I  am  ready  to 
concede  and  sacrifice  for  it  whatever  a  just  and  honorable 
man  ought  to  sacrifice.  I  will  do  no  more.  I  have  not 
heeded  the  aspersions  of  those  who  did  not  understand,  or 
desired  to  misrepresent,  my  conduct  or  opinions  in  relation 
to  these  questions  which,  in  my  judgment,  so  vitally  affect 
it.  The  time  has  come  when  I  shall  not  only  utter  them  but 
make  them  the  basis  of  my  political  action  here.  I  do  not, 
then,  hesitate,  to  avow  before  this  House  and  the  country, 
and  in  the  presence  of  the  living  God,  that  if  by  your  legis 
lation  you  seek  to  drive  us  from  the  territories  of  California 
and  New  Mexico,  purchased  by  the  common  blood  and  treas 
ure  of  the  whole  people,  and  to  abolish  slavery  in  this  Dis 
trict,  thereby  attempting  to  fix  a  national  degradation  upon 
half  the  states  of  this  Confederacy,  /  am  for  disunion;  and  if 
my  physical  courage  be  equal  to  the  maintenance  of  my 
convictions  of  right  and  duty,  I  will  devote  all  I  am  and  all 
I  have  on  earth  to  its  consummation. 

"From  1787  to  this  hour,  the  people  of  the  South  have 
asked  nothing  but  justice  —  nothing  but  the  maintenance 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  69 

of  the  principles  and  the  spirit  which  controlled  our  fathers 
in  the  formation  of  the  Constitution.  Unless  we  are  un 
worthy  of  our  ancestors,  we  will  never  accept  less  as  a  con 
dition  of  Union.  A  great  constitutional  right  which  was 
declared  by  a  distinguished  Northern  justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court  (Judge  Baldwin)  to  be  the  corner-stone  of  the  Union, 
and  without  which  he  avers,  in  a  judicial  decision,  it  would 
never  have  been  formed,  has  already  practically  been  abro 
gated  in  all  of  the  non-slaveholding  states.  I  mean  the 
right  to  reclaim  fugitives  from  labor.  I  ask  any  and  every 
Northern  man  on  this  floor  to  answer  me,  now,  if  this  is  not 
true  —  if  this  great  right,  indispensable  to  the  formation  of 
the  Union,  is  any  longer,  for  any  practical  purpose,  a  living 
principle?  There  are  none  to  deny  it.  You  admit  you  have 
not  performed  your  constitutional  duty,  that  you  withhold 
from  us  a  right  which  was  one  of  our  main  inducements  to 
the  Union;  yet  you  wonder  that  we  look  upon  your  eulogies  of 
a  Union  whose  most  sacred  principles  you  have  thus  trampled 
underfoot,  as  nothing  better  than  mercenary,  hypocritical  cant. 
"  This  District  was  ceded  immediately  after  the  Constitu 
tion  was  formed.  It  was  the  gift  of  Maryland  to  her  sister 
states  for  the  location  of  their  common  government.  Its 
municipal  law  maintained  and  protected  domestic  slavery. 
You  accepted  it.  Your  honor  was  pledged  for  its  mainte 
nance  as  a  national  capital.  Your  faith  was  pledged  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  rights  of  the  people  who  were  thus 
placed  under  your  care.  Your  fathers  accepted  the  trust, 
protected  the  slaveholder  and  all  other  citizens  in  their 
rights,  and  in  all  respects  faithfully  and  honestly  executed 
the  trust;  but  they  have  been  gathered  to  their  fathers,  and 
it  was  left  to  their  degenerate  sons  to  break  the  faith  with  us, 
and  insolently  to  attempt  to  play  the  master  where  they  were 
admitted  as  brethren.  I  trust,  sir,  if  the  representatives 
of  the  North  prove  themselves  unworthy  of  their  ancestors, 
we  shall  not  prove  ourselves  unworthy  of  ours;  that  we  have 
the  courage  to  defend  what  they  had  the  valor  to  win.  The 
territories  are  the  common  property  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  purchased  by  their  common  blood  and  treas 
ure.  You  are  their  common  agents;  it  is  your  duty  while 
they  are  in  a  territorial  state,  to  remove  all  impediments  to 
their  free  enjoyment  by  all  sections  and  all  people  of  the 
Union,  the  slaveholder  and  the  non-slaveholder.  You  have 


70  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

given  the  strongest  indications  that  you  will  not  perform  this 
trust  —  that  you  will  appropriate  to  yourselves  all  of  this 
territory,  perpetrate  all  of  these  wrongs  which  I  have 
enumerated;  yet  with  these  declarations  on  your  lips,  when 
Southern  men  refuse  to  act  in  party  caucuses  with  you,  in 
which  you  have  a  controlling  majority  —  when  we  ask  the 
simplest  guarantee  for  the  future  —  we  are  denounced  out 
of  doors  as  recusants  and  factionists,  and  indoors  we  are  met 
with  the  cry  of  *  Union,  Union/  Sir,  we  have  passed  that 
point.  It  is  too  late.  I  have  used  all  my  energies  from 
the  beginning  of  this  question  to  save  the  country  from  this 
convulsion.  I  have  resisted  what  I  deemed  unnecessary 
and  hurtful  agitation.  I  hoped  against  hope  that  a  sense 
of  justice  and  patriotism  would  induce  the  North  to  settle 
these  questions  upon  principles  honorable  and  safe  to  both 
sections  of  the  Union.  I  have  planted  myself  upon  a  na 
tional  platform,  resisting  extremes  at  home  and  abroad, 
willingly  subjecting  myself  to  the  aspersions  of  enemies, 
and  far  worse  than  that,  the  misconstruction  of  friends,  de 
termined  to  struggle  for  and  accept  any  fair  and  honorable 
adjustment  of  these  questions.  I  have  almost  despaired 
of  any  such,  at  least  from  this  House.  We  must  arouse 
and  appeal  to  the  nation.  We  must  tell  them,  boldly  and 
frankly,  that  we  prefer  any  calamities  to  submission  to  such 
degradation  and  injury  as  they  would  entail  upon  us;  that 
we  hold  that  to  be  the  consummation  of  all  evil.  I  have 
stated  my  positions.  I  have  not  argued  them.  I  reserve 
that  for  a  future  occasion.  These  are  principles  upon  which 
I  act  here.  Give  me  securities  that  the  power  of  the  organi 
zation  which  you  seek  will  not  be  used  to  the  injury  of  my 
constituents,  then  you  can  have  my  cooperation  but  not  till 
then.  Grant  them  and  you  prevent  the  recurrence  of  the 
disgraceful  scenes  of  the  last  twenty-four  hours,  and  restore 
tranquillity  to  the  country.  Refuse  them,  and  as  far  as  I 
am  concerned,  'let  discord  reign  foreveV.'"  * 

The  reporter  notes  that  "several  times  during  the  delivery 
of  these  remarks  Mr.  T.  was  interrupted  by  loud  bursts  of 
applause."  Stephens  of  Georgia  and  Colcock  of  South 
Carolina  followed  at  once  in  speeches  endorsing  Toombs, 

*  Congressional  Globe,  3ist.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  27,  28. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  71 

and  next  day  Andrew  Johnson  of  Tennessee  and  Clingman 
of  North  Carolina  made  similar  expressions,  the  latter 
incidentally  pronouncing  Toombs' s  speech  "one  of  the 
ablest,  most  forceful  and  eloquent  he  had  ever  heard,  as 
was  evident  from  the  profound  and  excited  sensation  it  had 
produced  in  the  House." 

To  escape  from  the  dangers  of  this  excitement  the  House 
now  adopted,  with  few  but  Toombs  dissenting,  a  resolu 
tion  to  return  to  its  ballotings  and  continue  them  without 
debate  until  an  election  should  be  effected.  In  the  next 
few  ballots  the  vote  was  much  more  scattered  than  before, 
with  Boyd  of  Kentucky  leading  for  the  Whigs  and  Stanley 
of  North  Carolina  for  the  Democrats.  No  election  by  mere 
balloting  was  in  sight.  On  December  17  a  new  plurality 
motion  was  offered  and  promptly  tabled,  and  then  a  resolu 
tion  to  appoint  a  committee  of  three  Whigs  and  three  Demo 
crats  to  report  a  plan  for  electing  a  Speaker  was  offered  and 
tabled.  After  another  fruitless  ballot  this  Whig-Democrat 
committee  resolution  was  renewed  arid  again  tabled  by  a 
majority  of  but  one  vote.  Next  day  the  plurality  resolu 
tion,  again  introduced,  was  opposed  by  Toombs  who  declared 
that  the  House  until  organized  had  not  the  right  to  make 
any  rules  whatever.  "They  were  not  a  law-making  power;" 
he  declared,  "nobody  knew  their  right  to  sit  here;  they  had 
not  done  their  first  duty  as  members  of  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives;  they  had  not  taken  the  oath,  which  bound  them 
to  the  throne  of  the  living  God,  to  obey  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States;  they  could  neither  make  rules  for  the 
House  nor  for  the  country."  Thereupon  the  resolution  was 
again  tabled  and  five  more  fruitless  ballots  taken,  Winthrop 
again  appearing  as  the  candidate  of  the  regular  Whigs,  and 
the  bolters  still  showing  no  slightest  sign  of  relenting. 

On  December  20,  Giddings,  as  a  Free-soil  spokesman, 
brought  it  to  light  that  on  the  preceding  night  Whig  and 
Democratic  caucuses  had  each  appointed  a  committee  to 


72  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

consult  with  the  committee  appointed  by  the  other  and 
devise  a  mode  of  organizing  the  House.  After  another  fruit 
less  ballot  the  House  adjourned  over  the  week-end.  As 
soon  as  Monday's  session  began,  December  22,  Mr.  Stanton 
of  Tennessee,  who  had  been  appointed  by  the  Democratic 
caucus  as  a  member  of  its  conference  committee,  rose  and 
said  that  he  desired  to  present  to  the  House  a  proposition 
which  had  resulted  from  the  conference  of  the  two  caucus 
committees.  Root,  an  Ohio  Free-soiler,  called  Stanton  to 
order,  when  Toombs  took  the  floor  and  executed  an  oratori 
cal  and  spectacular  tour  de  force.  His  purpose  of  course 
was  to  prevent  the  threatened  coalition  between  the  Demo 
crats  and  the  regular  Whigs  in  support  of  the  plan  for  which 
Mr.  Stanton  was  trying  to  secure  the  attention  of  the  House. 
Toombs  began  by  denying  afresh  the  power  of  the  House  to 
pass  a  rule  prohibiting  debate.  Several  members  attempted 
to  interrupt  him  by  calls  to  order  and  attempts  to  introduce 
resolutions,  but  Toombs  held  his  ground.  In  such  cases 
of  hubbub  the  jaded  reporter  usually  contented  himself 
with  writing  that  the  confusion  in  the  House  was  so  great 
that  nothing  could  be  heard  at  the  desk;  but  in  this  case 
he  seems  to  have  been  spurred  by  Toombs's  verve  to  achieve 
a  stenographic  triumph  of  his  own.  As  reported  in  the 
Congressional  Globe  *  the  speech  is  one  of  the  finest  examples 
of  vigorous  oratory  to  be  found  in  forensic  records.  To  be 
appreciated,  however,  it  should  be  read  in  full;  and  its 
length  is  too  great  for  it  to  be  reprinted  here. 

Toombs' s  effort  was  magnificent,  but  though  he  quelled 
the  tumult  upon  the  floor  he  could  not  conquer  the  joint 
strength  of  the  two  main  party  organizations.  A  motion 
to  rescind  the  rule  against  debate  was  defeated.  Then 
Mr.  Stanton  introduced  his  resolution  from  the  two  caucus 
committees,  that  the  House  proceed  at  once  to  the  election 
of  a  Speaker,  and  that  after  three  more  ballots  with  no 
*  3  ist.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  61-63. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  73 

member  receiving  a  majority  the  roll  be  again  called  and 
the  member  receiving  the  highest  vote,  provided  it  be  a 
majority  of  a  quorum,  be  declared  Speaker.  This  plurality 
rule  was  adopted  by  113  votes  to  106;  and  after  the  three 
preliminary  roll-calls  the  sixty-third  ballot  was  taken  with 
the  result  that  Howell  Cobb  received  102  votes,  Winthrop 
99,  Wilmot  8,  Morehead  and  Stephens  4  and  I  respectively 
of  the  bolting  Whigs,  and  7  scattering.  Cobb  was  accord 
ingly  declared  elected.  For  a  month  afterward,  however, 
though  the  bolting  Whigs  no  longer  followed  an  obstruc 
tionist  programme,  the  House  wasted  most  of  its  time 
balloting  for  clerk  and  doorkeeper. 

The  Senate  meanwhile  was  receiving  from  without  and 
within  a  flood  of  memorials,  resolutions  and  bills  concerning 
all  the  vexed  phases  of  the  slavery  question.  Clay  proposed 
his  "omnibus  bill"  on  January  29,  and  this  became  the 
principal  subject  of  interminable  Senate  debates  in  the 
months  following.  In  the  House  the  bulk  of  the  members 
were  so  loth  to  begin  the  slavery  battle  that  even  the  dis 
cussion  of  the  President's  annual  message  was  postponed 
till  February  12,  and  until  then  no  one  but  Clingman  of 
North  Carolina  and  Brown  of  Mississippi  on  behalf  of 
Southern  rights  and  Root,  the  Ohio  Free-soiler,  attempted  to 
raise  any  sectional  debate.  On  February  13,  President  Tay 
lor  in  a  special  message  presented  the  volunteer  anti-slavery 
constitution  with  which  the  people  of  California,  without 
the  authority  of  an  enabling  act,  were  asking  for  statehood. 
For  the  three  following  days  members  contented  themselves 
with  delivering  set  speeches  on  various  phases  of  the  slavery 
issue.  Then  on  the  i8th  Mr.  Doty  of  Wisconsin  introduced 
a  resolution  to  instruct  the  committee  on  territories  to 
prepare  and  report  a  bill  for  the  admission  of  California  with 
the  constitution  which  had  been  communicated  to  the  House 
by  the  President;  and  on  this  Mr.  Doty  demanded  the 
previous  question.  Mr.  Inge  of  Alabama  moved  to  table 


74  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  resolution,  but  his  motion  was  lost  by  70  to  121.  By 
this  the  Northern  majority  announced  its  intention  to  force 
the  bill  through  without  permitting  any  amendment  or 
debate.  Many  of  the  Southerners  were  in  favor  of  Cali 
fornia's  admission,  but  virtually  all  of  them  demanded  that 
the  territorial  question  should  be  first  adjusted.  The  whole 
Southern  delegation  accordingly  with  grim  determination 
resorted  at  once  to  obstructive  tactics.  Motions  to  adjourn 
alternated  with  motions  to  go  into  committee  of  the  whole. 
With  Cobb  in  the  chair  every  member  who  wished  to  make 
a  privileged  obstructive  motion  was  sure  to  be  recognized; 
and  the  minority  was  sufficiently  numerous  to  require  the 
yeas  and  nays  upon  every  motion.  The  roll,  two  hundred 
and  thirty  names  long,  was  called  again  and  again  with 
monotonous  regularity  throughout  the  day  and  half  the 
night.  Relations  became  strained  between  the  sectional 
groups  within  each  party.  At  length,  with  the  hope  of  reliev 
ing  the  tension,  the  conciliatory  Mr.  McClernand  of  Illinois 
walked  over  to  where  Toombs  and  Stephens,  the  managers 
of  the  obstruction,  were  sitting,  and  inquired  of  them  whether 
by  any  means  the  strain  could  be  ended.  In  reply  they 
explained  their  position  fully,  that  they  were  resisting  the 
California  bill  only  as  a  means  of  securing  the  prior  settle 
ment  of  the  Utah  and  New  Mexico  questions  on  the  basis 
of  no  congressional  exclusion  of  slavery  therein.  These 
propositions  were  put  in  writing  and  McClernand  circulated 
them  among  the  Northern  members  with  a  view  to  procur 
ing  an  adjournment.*  Motions  to  adjourn,  however,  con 
tinued  to  be  defeated  until  at  midnight  the  House  acquiesced 
in  a  novel  ruling  by  the  Speaker  that  the  legislative  day  had 
ended  and  Doty's  resolution  was  no  longer  in  order  for  con 
sideration.  On  the  following  night  a  conference  was  held 
at  Cobb's  house  between  Toombs,  Stephens,  Cobb  and  Boyd 
from  the  South  and  McClernand  and  other  friends  of  com- 
*  A.  H.  Stephens,  War  Between  the  States,  II,  201-203. 


THE     COMPROMISE    OF    1850  75 

promise  from  the  North.  It  was  there  agreed  that  all 
present,  and  Mr.  Douglas  also  who  had  empowered  Mr. 
McClernand  to  speak  for  him  as  chairman  of  the  Senate 
committee  on  territories,  should  combine  their  efforts  to 
procure  the  organization  of  the  territories  on  the  basis 
required,  and  the  admission  of  California,  and  also  to 
defeat  any  attempt  at  abolishing  slavery  in  the  District  of 
Columbia.* 

Before  these  plans  had  ripened  into  bills,  however,  the 
issue  was  reopened  in  the  House,  on  February  27.  In 
committee  of  the  whole  Toombs  took  the  floor,  saying  that 
in  view  of  the  clear  determination  of  the  House  to  deal  with 
California  he  would  discuss  that  question.  Mr.  Doty 
thereupon,  Toombs  yielding  for  the  purpose,  introduced  a 
bill  for  the  admission  of  California,  and  Toombs,  resuming, 
presented  in  a  maturely-considered  speech  during  the  allotted 
hour  views  characteristic  of  the  more  temperate  of  the  men 
who  now  stood  for  Southern  rights  without  superior  regard 
to  party  attachments.  He  said  in  part: 

"  Mr.  Chairman:  There  is  a  general  discontent  among  the 
people  of  fifteen  states  of  the  Union  against  this  Govern 
ment.  ...  It  is  based  upon  a  well-founded  apprehension 
of  a  fixed  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  non-slaveholding  states 
of  the  Union  to  destroy  their  political  rights.  .  .  .  We  are 
now,  sir,  in  a  transition  state;  heretofore  the  distribution 
of  political  power  under  our  system  has  made  sectional 
aggression  impossible.  I  think  it  would  have  been  wise 
to  have  secured  permanency  to  such  distribution  by  the 
fundamental  law.  It  was  not  done.  The  course  of  events, 
the  increase  of  population  in  the  Northern  portion  of  the 
republic  and  the  addition  of  new  states,  are  about  to  give, 
if  they  have  not  already  given,  the  non-slaveholding  states 
a  majority  in  both  branches  of  Congress,  and  they  have  a 
large  and  increasing  majority  of  the  population  of  the  Union. 
These  causes  have  brought  us  to  the  point  where  we  are 
to  test  the  sufficiency  of  written  constitutions  to  protect 

*  A.  H.  Stephens,  War  Between  the  States,  pp.  203,  204. 


76  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  rights  of  a  minority  against  a  majority  of  the  people, 
Upon  the  determination  of  this  question  will  depend  and 
ought  to  depend  the  permanency  of  the  government.  .  .  . 
Our  security,  under  the  Constitution,  is  based  solely  upon 
good  faith.  There  is  nothing  in  its  structure  which  makes 
aggression  permanently  impossible.  It  requires  neither 
skill  nor  genius  nor  courage  to  perpetrate  it;  it  requires  only 
bad  faith.  I  have  studied  the  histories  of  nations  and  the 
characteristics  of  mankind  to  but  little  purpose  if  that  quality 
shall  be  found  wanting  in  the  future  administration  of  its 
affairs.  .  .  . 

"  I  have  heard  in  this  hall,  within  a  few  days  past,  fierce 
and  bitter  denunciations  from  Northern  lips  of  Abolitionists 
—  those  of  the  Garrison  school  who  sometimes  chance  to 
meet  in  Faneuil  Hall.  In  my  judgment  their  line  of  policy 
is  the  fairest,  most  just,  most  honest  and  defensible  of  all 
the  enemies  of  our  institutions.  And  such  will  be  the  judg 
ment  of  impartial  history.  'They  shun  no  question,  they 
wear  no  mask/  They  admit  some,  at  least,  of  the  constitu 
tional  obligations  to  protect  slavery.  They  hold  these 
obligations  inconsistent  with  good  conscience,  and  they 
therefore  denounce  the  [Constitution]  as  'a  covenant  with 
Hell/  and  struggle  earnestly  for  its  overthrow.  If  their  con 
duct  is  devoid  of  every  other  virtue  and  every  other  claim  to 
our  respect,  it  is  at  least  consistent.  They  do  not  seek,  as 
many  members  do  here,  to  get  the  benefits  and  shun  the 
burdens  of  the  bargain. 

"  Notwithstanding  the  constitutional  safeguards,  .  .  .  the 
enemies  of  slavery  here  have  attempted,  and  are  now  attempt 
ing,  to  get  by  implication  that  power  to  war  upon  it  which 
was  so  studiously  withheld.  .  .  .  This  government  has  no 
power  to  declare  what  shall  or  what  shall  not  be  property, 
or  to  regulate  the  manner  or  places  of  its  employment,  except 
in  the  cases  of  patent  rights  and  copyrights.  This  power 
belongs  to  the  state  governments  to  the  extent  that  it  exists 
anywhere.  Whatever  any  of  the  states  recognize  as  property 
it  is  the  duty  of  this  government  to  protect.  When  it  places 
itself  in  hostility  to  property  thus  secured,  it  becomes  the 
enemy  of  the  people  and  ought  to  be  corrected  or  sub 
verted.  .  .  . 

"  We  do  not  demand,  as  is  constantly  alleged  on  this  floor 
and  elsewhere,  that  you  shall  establish  slavery  in  the  terri- 


THE    COMPROMISE   OF    1850  77 

tories.  I  have  endeavored  to  show  that  you  have  no  power 
to  do  so.  Slavery  is  a  *  fixed  fact'  in  your  system.  We 
ask  protection  from  all  hostile  impediments  to  the  intro 
duction  and  peaceful  enjoyment  of  all  of  our  property  in  the 
territories;  whether  these  impediments  arise  from  foreign 
laws  or  from  any  pretended  domestic  authority,  we  hold  it 
to  be  your  duty  to  remove  them.  .  .  .  The  bill  now  before 
us  for  the  admission  of  California  .  .  .  settles  nothing  but 
the  addition  of  another  non-slaveholding  state  to  the  Union, 
thus  giving  the  predominating  interest  additional  power  to 
settle  the  territorial  questions  which  it  leaves  unadjusted.  In 
this  state  of  the  question  it  cannot  receive  my  support.  .  .  . 

"  We  are  now  daily  threatened  with  every  form  of  extermi 
nation  if  we  do  not  tamely  acquiesce  in  whatever  legislation 
the  majority  may  choose  to  impose  upon  us.  .  .  .  Gentlemen 
may  spare  their  threats.  .  .  .  The  sentiment  of  every  true 
man  at  the  South  will  be,  we  took  the  Union  and  the  Con 
stitution  together  —  we  will  have  both  or  we  will  have 
neither.  This  cry  of  the  Union  is  the  masked  battery  from 
behind  which  the  Constitution  and  the  rights  of  the  South 
are  to  be  assailed.  .  .  . 

"  I  have  never  yet  given  a  sectional  vote  in  these  halls. 
Whenever  the  state  of  public  opinion  in  my  own  section 
shall  deter  me,  or  the  injustice  of  the  other  shall  incapacitate 
me  from  supporting  the  true  interests  of  the  whole  nation 
and  the  just  demands  of  every  part  of  the  republic,  I  will 
then  surrender  a  trust  which  I  can  no  longer  hold  with 
honor.  .  .  . 

"  The  first  act  of  legislative  hostility  to  slavery  is  the  proper 
point  for  Southern  resistance.  .  .  .  Though  hostile  inter 
ference  is  the  point  of  resistance,  non-interference  is  not  the 
measure  of  our  rights.  We  are  entitled  to  non-interference 
from  alien  and  foreign  governments.  .  .  .  You  owe  us  more. 
You  owe  us  protection.  Withhold  it  and  you  make  us  aliens 
in  aur  own  government.  Our  hostility  to  it  then  becomes  a 
necessity  —  a  necessity  justified  by  our  honor,  our  interests 
and  our  common  safety.  .  .  .  We  had  our  institutions  when 
you  sought  our  alliance.  We  were  content  with  them  then, 
and  we  are  content  with  them  now.  We  have  not  sought 
to  thrust  them  upon  you,  nor  to  interfere  with  yours.  If 
you  believe  what  you  say,  that  yours  are  so  much  the  best 
to  promote  the  happiness  and  good  government  of  society, 


78  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

why  do  you  fear  our  equal  competition  with  you  in  the 
territories?  We  only  ask  that  our  common  government 
shall  protect  us  both  equally  until  the  territories  shall  be 
ready  to  be  admitted  as  states  into  the  Union,  then  to  leave 
their  citizens  free  to  adopt  any  domestic  policy  in  reference 
to  this  subject  which  in  their  judgment  may  best  promote 
their  interest  and  their  happiness.  The  demand  is  just. 
...  I  can  see  no  reasonable  prospect  that  you  will  grant  it. 
The  fact  cannot  longer  be  concealed  —  the  declaration  of 
many  members  here  confirms  it,  the  action  of  this  House  is 
daily  demonstrating  it  —  that  we  are  in  the  midst  of  a 
legislative  revolution,  the  object  of  which  is  to  trample 
under  foot  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  and  to  make  the 
will  of  the  majority  the  supreme  law  of  the  land.  In  this 
emergency  our  duty  is  clear;  it  is  to  stand  by  the  Constitu 
tion  and  the  laws,  to  observe  in  good  faith  all  its  require 
ments  until  the  wrong  is  consummated,  until  the  act  of 
exclusion  is  put  upon  the  statute  book;  it  will  then  be 
demonstrated  that  the  Constitution  is  powerless  for  our 
protection;  it  will  then  be  not  only  the  right  but  the  duty  of 
the  slaveholding  states  to  resume  the  powers  which  they 
have  conferred  upon  this  government,  and  to  seek  new 
safeguards  for  their  future  security.  It  will  then  become  our 
right  to  prevent  the  application  of  the  resources  of  the 
republic  to  the  maintenance  of  the  wrongful  act.  .  .  . 

"  [The  description  by  Mr.  Mann  of  Massachusetts  of  the 
dangers  threatening  the  South]  is  an  appeal  from  the  argu 
ment  to  our  fears.  I  answer  that  appeal  in  the  language  of 
a  distinguished  Georgian  who  yet  lives  to  arouse  the  hearts 
of  his  countrymen  to  resistance  to  wrong:  When  the  argu 
ment  is  exhausted  we  will  stand  by  our  arms."  * 

Toombs  here  showed  a  sense  of  tremendous  responsibility 
and  a  resolution  to  restrain  himself  from  provoking  the 
tyranny  which  he  foresaw  and  a  determination  to  do  all  that 
lay  in  his  power  in  a  parliamentary  way  to  obstruct  the 
culmination  which  would  force  him  to  strike  for  Southern 
independence.  His  argument  was  closely  similar  to  that 
presented  by  Calhoun  five  days  later  in  his  great  speech 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  3ist.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  198-201. 


THE   COMPROMISE   OF    1850  79 

of  March  4.  Calhoun  of  course  recognized  this,  and  a  few 
days  before  his  death  at  the  end  of  March  he  had  a  con 
ference  with  Toombs  in  which  he  expressed  his  despair  of 
Southern  rights  within  the  Union,  spoke  of  his  own  approach 
ing  death,  and  in  a  sense  let  fall  his  mantle  upon  Toombs's 
shoulders  as  the  leader  of  the  younger  group  of  Southern 
statesmen.* 

In  the  Senate,  Webster's  Seventh  of  March  speech  mel 
lowed  the  spirit  of  the  discussion,  and  the  death  of  Calhoun 
impressed  his  colleagues  with  the  solemnity  of  their  duty 
in  solving  the  problem  which  had  worn  his  life  away.  Taylor 
and  his  cabinet,  however,  were  unfriendly  to  the  proposed 
compromise,  and  progress  with  it  was  very  slow.  In  the 
House  no  way  was  found  to  soften  the  asperities.  Set 
speeches  on  the  slavery  issue  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
first  frequent,  then  more  seldom,  then  frequent  again, 
filled  the  interims  of  other  business.  Clay's  compromise 
bill  was  of  course  actively  discussed  in  the  House  even  while 
it  was  pending  only  in  the  Senate.  Without  waiting  further 
for  Senate  action,  Mr.  McClernand  gave  notice  in  the  House 
on  April  3  of  his  intention  to  introduce  a  bill  comprising  Clay's 
proposals  regarding  California,  Utah,  New  Mexico,  and  the 
Texas  boundary.  Toombs  wrote  to  Crittenden,  April  23 : 

"  In  the  course  of  events  the  policy  of  the  cabinett  has 
vacillated  to  and  fro,  but  has  finally  settled  upon  the  ground 
of  admitting  California  and  non-action  as  to  the  rest  of  the 
territories.  Seward  and  his  party  have  struck  hands  with 
them  on  this  policy.  But  Stanley  is  the  only  Southern  Whig 
who  will  stand  by  them.  I  think  it  likely  the  current  of 
events  may  throw  the  whole  of  the  Southern  Whigs  into 
opposition.  Such  a  result  will  not  deter  us  from  our  course. 
We  are  willing  to  admit  California  and  pass  territorial  govern 
ment  on  the  principle  of  McClernand's  bill.  We  will  never 
take  less.  The  government  in  furtherance  of  their  stupid 

*  Letter  of  C.  S.  Morehead,  Washington,  D.C.,  Mch.  31,  1850,  to  J.  J. 
Crittenden.  Coleman's  Crittenden,  I,  353. 


8o  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  treacherous  bargain  with  the  North  are  endeavoring  to 
defeat  it.  With  their  aid  we  could  carry  it  almost  without 
a  count,  as  more  than  twenty-five  Northern  Democrats  are 
pledged  to  it;  but  they  may  embarrass  us  and  possibly 
(but  I  do  not  think  probably)  may  defeat  us;  but  our  defeat 
will  be  their  ruin."  * 

But  party  considerations  prevented  action  upon  McCler- 
nand's  bill,  and  the  discussion  dragged  until  the  date,  June 
II,  on  which  the  House  had  ordered  the  closing  of  debate  in 
committee  on  Doty's  resolution,  drew  near.  Then  members 
became  more  excited  and  vehement.  On  June  3,  for  example, 
Mr.  Colcock,  a  Southern  extremist,  denounced  Clay's  plan  of 
compromise  on  the  ground  that  everything  which  it  proposed 
to  give  the  South  it  gave  only  in  promise,  while  what  it  gave 
the  North  it  gave  in  fact  and  in  performance.  Andrew  John 
son,  a  pro-slavery  nationalist,  on  the  other  hand  appealed  on 
June  5  for  concessions  from  all  sides,  expressing  his  firm  devo 
tion  to  the  Union  and  the  belief  that  its  preservation  was  to  be 
looked  to  as  the  surest  support  and  protection  of  slavery. 

Upon  the  arrival  of  June  n  the  Southerners  had  as  yet 
found  no  means  of  defeating  the  Doty  California  resolution. 
They  accordingly  tried  to  postpone  the  time  for  closing  the 
debate,  and  failing  in  this  they  adopted  the  device  of  offer 
ing  amendments  and  making  five-minute  speeches  upon 
them,  which  the  rules  of  the  House  permitted.  This  adroit 
method  of  obstruction  threatened  to  continue  interminably. 
Many  of  these  brief  speeches  were  utilized  for  reiterating 
arguments  and  for  making  recriminations,  though  most 
of  them  were  delivered  purely  in  order  to  consume  the  time 
of  the  House  and  baffle  the  majority. 

But  Toombs  never  droned.  On  June  15  he  electrified  the 
House  in  a  reply  to  Mr.  Schenck: 

*  MS.  in  the  Library  of  Congress.  Published  with  minor  inaccuracies  in 
Coleman's  Life  of  Crittenden,  I,  364-366,  under  the  erroneous  date  of  April 
25,  1850. 


THE   COMPROMISE   OF    1850  8l 

"The  gentleman  from  Ohio  [has]  just  charged  that  the  op 
position  to  California  with  her  present  constitution  by  the 
South  was  founded  upon  the  anti-slavery  clause  in  her  con 
stitution,  and  therefore,  in  the  denial  of  this  right  of  a  peo 
ple  forming  a  state  constitution  to  admit  or  exclude  slavery. 
Mr.  T.  denied  the  fact  and  demanded  proof.  On  the  con 
trary,  he  asserted  that  the  South  had  uniformly  held  and 
maintained  this  right.  That  in  1820  on  the  Missouri  ques 
tion  the  North  had  denied  it,  but  the  South  unanimously 
affirmed  it.  From  that  day  till  this  the  South,  through  all 
her  authorized  exponents  of  her  opinions,  has  affirmed  this 
doctrine.  .  .  .  But  how  stands  the  case  with  the  North? 
She  denied  the  truth  of  this  great  principle  of  constitutional 
right  in  1820,  acquiesced  in  the  compromise  then  made  as 
long  as  it  was  to  her  interest,  and  then  repudiated  the  com 
promise  and  reasserted  her  right  to  dictate  constitutions  to 
territories  seeking  admission  into  the  Union.  She  put  her 
anti-slavery  proviso  upon  Oregon,  and  at  the  last  session 
of  Congress,  when  the  present  Secretary  of  the  Navy  [Mr. 
Preston]  introduced  a  bill  to  authorize  California  to  form 
a  state  government  and  come  into  the  Union,  leaving  her 
free  to  act  as  she  pleased  upon  the  question  of  slavery,  the 
North  put  the  anti-slavery  proviso  upon  this  state  bill. 
I  know  of  no  Northern  Whig  who  voted  against  that  proviso. 
A  few  gentlemen  of  the  Democratic  party  from  the  North 
west,  and  my  friend  from  Illinois  among  them  [Mr.  Richard 
son],  boldly  and  honestly  struck  for  the  right  and  opposed 
it;  but  they  were  powerless  against  the  tide  of  Northern 
opposition.  The  evidence  is  complete;  the  North  repudiated 
this  principle  —  and  while  for  sinister  and  temporary  pur 
poses  they  may  pretend  to  favor  the  President's  plan,  which 
affirms  it,  they  will  not  sustain  it.  They  will  not  find  a  right 
place  to  affirm  it  until  they  get  California  into  the  Union, 
and  then  they  will  throw  off  the  mask  and  trample  it  under 
foot.  I  intend  to  drag  off  the  mask  before  the  consummation 
of  that  act.  We  do  not  oppose  California  on  account  of  the 
anti-slavery  clause  in  her  constitution.  It  was  her  right, 
and  I  am  not  even  prepared  to  say  that  she  acted  unwisely 
in  its  exercise  —  that  is  her  business;  but  I  stand  upon  the 
great  principle  that  the  South  has  the  right  to  an  equal  par 
ticipation  in  the  territories  of  the  United  States.  I  claim  the 
right  for  her  to  enter  them  all  with  her  property  and  securely 


82  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

to  enjoy  it.  She  will  divide  with  you  if  you  wish  it;  but  the 
right  to  enter  all  or  divide  I  shall  never  surrender.  In  my 
judgment  this  right,  involving  as  it  does  political  equality,  is 
worth  a  thousand  such  Unions  as  we  have,  even  if  they  each 
were  a  thousand  times  more  valuable  than  this.  I  speak  not 
for  others  but  for  myself.  Deprive  us  of  this  right  and  ap 
propriate  this  common  property  to  yourselves,  it  is  then  your 
government,  not  mine.  Then  I  am  its  enemy,  and  I  will 
then,  if  I  can,  bring  my  children  and  my  constituents  to  the 
altar  of  liberty,  and  like  Hamilcar  I  would  swear  them  to 
eternal  hostility  to  your  foul  domination.  Give  us  our  just 
rights,  and  we  are  ready,  as  ever  heretofore,  to  stand  by  the 
Union,  every  part  of  it,  and  its  every  interest.  Refuse  it  and 
for  one  I  will  strike  for  independence"  * 

The  spirit  of  this  impromptu,  which  Stephens  in  after 
years  said  produced  the  greatest  sensation  he  had  ever 
witnessed  in  the  House,  and  which  at  once  leaped  into  fame 
in  the  South  as  Toombs's  "Hamilcar  speech,"  was  too  bold 
for  the  Northern  representatives  to  hope  to  wear  it  away. 
The  Doty  bill  was  allowed  sleep  in  committee  from  that 
day  for  six  weeks. 

Taylor's  employment  of  the  presidential  influence  against 
the  Clay  proposals  formed  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  the 
compromise  project  as  long  as  Taylor  lived.  Toombs  and 
Stephens  had  again  endeavored  to  persuade  him  in  its 
favor  at  the  end  of  February,  mentioning  the  prospect  of 
the  withdrawal  of  the  South  from  the  Union  in  the  event 
of  its  failure.  But  Taylor  had  then  angrily  replied  that  the 
Union  should  be  preserved  at  every  hazard,  and  that  he 
was  prepared  if  need  be  to  take  his  place  at  the  head  of  the 
armed  forces  of  the  nation  to  put  down  any  attempt  to  dis 
turb  it.f  Their  dread  of  the  consequences  to  follow  the 
defeat  of  the  Compromise  forbade  its  Southern  advocates 
to  accept  as  final  even  such  a  rebuff  as  this.  On  July  I  the 

*  Congressional  Globe,  3ist.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  1216. 
t  A.  C.  Cole,  The  Whig  Party  in  the  South  (MS.);  New  Orleans  Bulletin, 
Mch.  2,  1850. 


THE    COMPROMISE   OF    1850  83 

Southern  Whigs  in  Congress  held  a  secret  meeting  and 
appointed  C.  M.  Conrad  of  Louisiana,  Humphrey  Marshall 
of  Kentucky  and  Toombs  as  a  committee  to  exhort  the 
President  and  to  tell  him  that  if  he  persisted  in  his  policy 
his  Southern  friends  would  be  driven  into  the  opposition.* 
The  members  of  jthis  committee  called  upon  Taylor  sepa 
rately  and  used  such  arguments  as  they  deemed  proper  in 
strengthening  the  force  of  their  message.  Toombs  paid 
his  visit  on  July  3,  accompanied  by  Stephens. 

The  National  Intelligencer  had  published  that  morning  a 
report  that  an  armed  conflict  was  imminent  between  the 
forces  of  the  United  States  and  those  of  Texas  for  the  posses 
sion  of  the  New  Mexican  area  in  dispute.  Stephens  took 
offense  at  the  tone  of  an  editorial  which  accompanied  this 
article,  and  on  the  same  day  wrote  to  the  editor  of  the 
Intelligencer  a  public  letter,  denying  that  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  United  States  army  detachment  at  Santa  Fe  to  pre 
vent  the  extension  of  Texan  jurisdiction  over  such  portion  of 
New  Mexico  as  lay  east  of  the  Rio  Grande;  and  he  declared: 
"The  first  federal  gun  that  shall  be  fired  against  the  people 
of  Texas,  without  the  authority  of  law,  will  be  the  signal 
for  the  freemen  from  the  Delaware  to  the  Rio  Grande  to 
rally  to  the  rescue."  f 

Stephens  was  of  course  still  laboring  under  the  excite 
ment  of  this  episode  when  he  and  Toombs  called  upon  the 
President.  Of  that  visit  and  of  a  conversation,  apparently 
on  the  same  day,  with  Preston,  the  Secretary  of  War,  Ste 
phens  wrote  in  after  years: 

"Taylor  died  in  July,  1850,  when  all  was  at  sea  on  the  ad 
justment.  A  few  days  before  his  attack  [of  illness]  I  had  a 
long  and  earnest  interview  with  him  and  urged  him  to  change 
his  policy,  which  was  at  that  time  to  send  troops  to  Santa 

*  J.  F.  H.  Claiborne,  Life  and  Correspondence  of  John  A.  Quitman, 
N.  Y.,  1860,  II,  32,  33. 

t  National  Intelligencer,  July  4,  1850. 


84  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Fe,  Texas,  and  take  federal  occupation  of  territory  against 
the  claim  of  Texas  —  Seward's  game,  as  I  believed.  I  went 
to  see  Preston,  Toombs  with  me.  Preston  was  not  at  home; 
we  met  him  in  front  of  the  Treasury  building;  we  had  a  long 
talk;  Toombs  said  little,  that  little  on  my  side.  I  told 
Preston  that  if  troops  were  ordered  to  Santa  Fe  the  Presi 
dent  would  be  impeached.  'Who  will  impeach  him?'  asked 
he.  'I  will  if  nobody  else  does/  I  replied.  We  then  turned 
and  parted."  * 

A  rumor  of  these  occurrences  reached  the  newspaper 
correspondents,  and  one  of  them,  signing  himself  "Henrico," 
wrote  a  wretchedly  garbled  account  which  was  not  only 
published  by  his  paper,  the  Philadelphia  Bulletin,  but  was 
widely  reprinted  by  other  journals.  This  related  that 
Toombs  and  Stephens  had  gone  to  Taylor  during  his  illness, 
which  began  on  July  4  and  ended  fatally  on  July  9;  that  they 
had  upbraided  him  for  treason  to  the  South  and  had  threat 
ened  him  with  a  vote  of  censure  in  Congress  for  his  participa 
tion  in  the  affair  of  the  Galphin  claim.  "Henrico"  shortly 
afterward  corrected  his  error  as  to  the  date,  saying  that 
the  visit  to  Taylor  had  been  paid  on  July  3,  before  the  begin 
ning  of  Taylor's  illness;  but  the  correction  was  doubtless 
not  so  widely  printed  as  the  original  account.  Stephens 
issued  a  public  letter  on  July  13  denying  that  he  and  Toombs 
had  made  any  threat  in  regard  to  the  Galphin  affair.  Toombs, 
following  his  usual  custom,  paid  no  attention  to  the  canard. 
Along  with  Stephens,  though  still  more  staunchly,  Toombs 
was  a  consistent  supporter  of  the  Galphin  claim,  as  will  be 
seen  in  our  second  chapter  following.  A  threat  from  him 
to  censure  Taylor's  mild  endorsement  of  the  claim  would 
have  been  flagrantly  stultifying.  To  convince  anyone 
acquainted  with  Toombs's  character  that  he  was  guilty  of 
this  would  require  the  strongest  evidence.  In  the  complete 
absence  of  supporting  testimony  the  report  must  be  dis- 

*  A.  H.  Stephens,  Recollections,  M.  L.  Avery  ed.,  p.  26. 


THE    COMPROMISE   OF    1850  85 

missed  as  the  crass  conjecture  of  a  hostile  journalist.  The 
Democratic  press  of  the  day,  however,  abetted  by  the  New 
York  Tribune,  indulged  in  an  unusual  degree  of  sensationalism 
over  it,  some  of  them  going  so  far  as  to  charge  that  Toombs 
and  Stephens  had  stood  over  the  suffering  President's  bed 
and  fiendishly  hastened  his  death  by  their  reproaches  and  the 
threat  of  public  censure.  And  even  a  historian  so  careful  as 
Mr.  Rhodes  has  been  led  by  the  intemperate  partisan  press 
of  the  time  into  republishing  the  original  statement  without 
questioning  its  accuracy.* 

Upon  Taylor's  death  a  "Northern  man  with  Southern 
principles"  acceded  to  the  presidency  in  the  person  of 
Millard  Fillmore,  and  the  Southern  prospect  began  to 
brighten.  The  Doty  resolution  was  again  taken  up  in  the 
House,  but  was  again  obstructed  and  again  laid  aside.  The 
Northerners  had  tried  repeatedly  to  facilitate  their  purpose 
by  suspending  the  rules  whereby  obstruction  was  made 
possible,  but  the  South  had  votes  enough  to  prevent  the 
passage  of  any  motion  which  like  this  one  required  a  two- 
thirds  majority.  On  August  14,  indeed,  the  House  amended 
the  rules  in  a  way  which  rendered  obstruction  more  difficult; 
but  even  with  this  revision  it  was  doubtful  that  the  Southern 
ers  could  ever  be  overridden;  and  the  attempt  was  not  made. 
The  Senate  had  already  begun  to  pass  in  fairly  rapid  succes 
sion  the  several  bills  into  which  Clay's  original  proposal  had 
been  separated,  and  the  Southerners  in  the  House  had  at 
last  a  chance  to  do  something  else  than  obstruct. 

On  August  28  when  the  Senate  bill  for  restricting  the 
boundary  of  Texas  and  assuming  the  Texan  debt  to  the 
amount  of  ten  million  dollars  was  pending  in  the  House, 
Mr.  Boyd  of  Kentucky  moved  to  amend  by  adding  to  it 
the  Senate  bill  for  organizing  the  territories  of  Utah  and  New 
Mexico  on  the  basis  of  non-intervention  with  slavery  therein. 

*  A.  C.  Cole,  The  Whig  Party  in  the  South  (MS.);  Rhodes,  History  of  the 
United  States,  I,  175-177;  Baltimore  Clipper,  July  15,  1850. 


86  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

As  a  sign  of  the  times,  next  day  during  a  stormy  debate 
Mr.  Brooks  of  New  York,  a  former  supporter  of  the  Wilmot 
Proviso,  announced  to  the  House:  "To  settle  this  terrible 
agitation  in  this  hall  and  chamber,  ...  I  am  willing  to 
become  a  convert  to  the  doctrine  of  non-intervention  — 
and  in  good  faith  too.  ...  I  will  stand  upon  the  principle 
that  the  authority  of  this  government  shall  not  be  exerted 
to  exclude  or  extend  slavery,  the  principle  of  compromise 
upon  which  it  was  framed."  Mr.  Boyd  withdrew  that 
portion  of  his  amendment  which  related  to  Utah,  leaving 
the  New  Mexico  provision  to  be  voted  upon.  A  vote  was 
reached  on  September  4,  when  Boyd's  amendment  was 
rejected  by  98  to  106;  and  this  led  to  the  rejection  of  the 
main  bill  by  80  to  126.  Next  day  both  of  these  votes 
were  reconsidered.  Toombs  then  moved  to  amend  Boyd's 
amendment  by  adding  a  provision  that  no  citizen  of  the 
United  States  should  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty  or  property 
in  the  said  territory  except  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers 
and  the  law  of  the  land;  and  that  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  and  such  federal  laws  as  should  not  be  locally 
inapplicable,  and  the  common  law  as  it  existed  in  the  British 
Colonies  of  America  until  July  4,  1776,  should  be  the  exclu 
sive  laws  upon  African  slavery,  until  altered  by  the  proper 
authority.  The  two  clauses  of  this  amendment  were  voted 
upon  separately;  the  first  one  was  adopted  without  a  divi 
sion,  the  second  rejected  by  64  to  121.  When  thus  amended 
Boyd's  amendment  was  adopted  by  106  to  99,  but  the  bill 
was  then  again  rejected  by  99  to  107.  On  the  following  day, 
however,  the  vote  on  the  bill  was  again  reconsidered,  and 
although  a  group  of  Southern  extremists  still  opposed  it,  the 
bill  as  amended  received  108  ayes  on  its  final  passage,  in 
cluding  of  course  that  of  Toombs,  against  97  noes;  and  was 
thereby  adopted.  On  Sept.  7  the  bill  for  California's  ad 
mission  was  passed  without  obstruction  by  150  to  56,  Toombs 
voting  no  because  of  the  irregularities  in  her  application. 


THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850  87 

Consideration  of  the  Senate  bill  for  the  organization  of 
Utah  on  the  non-intervention  principle  followed  immedi 
ately.  Mr.  Seddon  of  Virginia  and  Mr,  Fitch  of  Indiana 
offered  pro-  and  anti-slavery  amendments  respectively, 
both  of  which  were  defeated.  Thereupon  Mr.  Bayley  of 
Virginia  remarked  that  it  was  evident  that  the  majority 
of  the  House  meant  to  pass  the  bill  in  its  present  form,  and 
he  hoped  that  Southerners  would  offer  no  further  amend 
ments.  Seddon  in  reply  expressed  his  irreconcilable  opposi 
tion  to  the  bill  as  it  stood,  characterizing  it  as  "the  last 
of  a  series  of  connected  outrages  on  our  section  and  its 
citizens,"  and  appealing  to  Southern  members  to  resist. 
He  said: 

"  Let  us  not  weaken  the  force  of  our  opposition  and  re 
pugnance  by  acquiescence  in  this  the  pettiest  of  the  whole. 
Here,  indeed,  it  may  avail  nothing.  From  the  dominant 
majority  here  we  can  expect  no  redress  —  not  even  the 
simplest  justice.  We  speak  to  sealed  ears  —  to  fixed  minds. 
But  beyond  them  there  is  yet  a  power  we  may  invoke  with 
hope.  To  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  there  may  be 
appeal,  and  there  we  may  find  a  power  to  resist  wrongs  and 
maintain  rights.  In  my  humble  judgment  the  honor  and 
safety  of  the  Southern  people  are  involved  in  the  issues  of 
these  measures,  and  to  them,  with  the  confidence  which 
their  history  and  their  character  justify,  let  us  refer,  as  be 
comes  their  Representatives,  the  determination  of  the  extent 
of  the  wrong  done  and  l  the  mode  and  measure  of  redress/  ' 

Toombs  began  to  reply  to  this,  when  Seddon  assailed  him 
for  abandoning  the  Southern  cause.  Toombs  then  replied 
by  showing  that  the  Texan  boundary  bill  which  Seddon 
declared  an  outrage  upon  the  South  had  been  opposed  by  a 
majority  of  twelve  in  the  Northern  vote  and  had  been 
carried  by  a  majority  of  twenty-three  in  the  vote  of  the 
Southern  members.  As  to  the  merits  of  the  bill,  he  approved 
the  Texan  boundary  bill  as  "not  only  just  but  generous  to 
Texas.  She  has  a  technical  but  not  a  meritorious  title  to 


88  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  country  ceded  ";  and  the  Texans  in  Congress  had  accepted 
the  settlement.  As  to  California  he  said  he  did  not  consider 
her  admission  an  aggression  upon  the  South,  and  had  voted 
against  it  only  upon  non-sectional  grounds.  The  proposal 
which  many  Southern  members  had  favored  of  dividing  Cali 
fornia  into  two  parts,  he  said,  would  have  resulted  only  in  the 
erection  in  the  near  future  of  two  non-slaveholding  states  in 
California  instead  of  one.  He  concluded  by  saying: 

"  From  the  first  day  of  this  session  to  this  hour  I  have 
had  but  one  ultimatum.  That  was  —  hostile  legislation  by 
Congress  against  our  property.  That  I  have  been,  now 
am,  and  shall  ever  be  ready  to  resist.  No  man  is  more 
rejoiced  than  I  am  that  this  alternative  is  not  presented  to 
me  by  these  bills.  What  I  have  conceded  in  these  bills  is 
only  what  the  honorable  gentleman's  friends  in  the  South 
have  for  the  last  ten  years  generally  held  was  not  only 
unnecessary  but  almost  treasonable  to  demand.  I  have  not 
conceded  it  to  them  —  I  have  conceded  it  to  the  public  will, 
to  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  the  Republic,  trusting  that 
if  further  events  shall  prove  that  those  who  differed  from 
me  are  wrong,  a  sense  of  national  justice,  purified  by  the 
fiery  ordeal  through  which  we  have  passed,  will  indicate 
the  right  and  do  justice  to  my  country."  * 

The  bill  was  promptly  passed  by  97  to  85.  On  September 
12  the  Senate  bill  for  the  more  effective  rendition  of  fugitive 
slaves  was  taken  up  and  promptly  passed  by  109  to  75,  and 
on  September  17  the  Senate  bill  for  the  abolition  of  the  slave 
trade  in  the  District  of  Columbia  was  passed  with  similar 
expedition  by  127  to  47,  Toombs  not  voting.  By  this  was 
concluded,  whether  for  the  good  or  evil  fortune  of  the  South, 
the  enactment  of  the  great  sectional  readjustment  of  1850. 
The  question  still  remained  whether  the  Southern  people 
would  accept  it  as  a  settlement.  After  enacting  the  appro 
priation  bills,  Congress  adjourned  on  September  30,  and  the 
members  returned  home  to  debate  the  question  anew  before 
their  constituents. 

*  Congressional  Globe,  3ist.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  1774,  1775. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  GEORGIA  PLATFORM 

IT  is  clear  from  the  foregoing  narrative  that  Toombs  was 
a  devotee  of  the  Union  as  well  as  of  Southern  rights. 
His  labors  were  indeed  as  essential  in  securing  the  enact 
ment  of  the  Union-saving  Compromise  as  were  those  even 
of  Clay  and  Webster.  His  vociferous  obstruction  in  Decem 
ber  prevented  Winthrop  and  the  Provisoists  from  seizing  the 
organization  of  the  House;  his  indomitable  resistance  in 
February  thwarted  the  Provisoist  majority's  efforts  to 
shape  the  legislative  programme  and  gave  to  the  evenly 
balanced  Senate  its  chance  to  take  the  lead;  his  continued 
defiance  in  June  heartened  the  minority  to  keep  up  its  fight 
until  the  death  of  Taylor  enabled  Fillmore,  a  friend  of  the 
Compromise,  to  use  the  patronage  to  bring  the  House 
mercenaries  into  line;  and  finally  his  vigorous  endorsement 
of  the  whole  group  of  pending  measures  in  September  per 
suaded  wavering  Southerners  and  accomplished  the  enact 
ment.  If  he  had  followed  the  opposite  course  at  any  stage, 
the  adjustment  would  almost  certainly  have  been  defeated. 
Indeed  had  he  desired  an  issue  upon  which  to  proclaim  out 
rage  to  the  South  and  lead  a  secession  movement,  he  needed 
only  to  rest  passive  in  any  of  the  successive  crises  of  the 
session  and  Congress  would  with  little  doubt  have  furnished 
him  with  a  very  substantial  grievance  upon  which  to  make 
a  campaign.  The  vehemence  of  his  speeches  was  due  partly 
for  his  fondness  for  tours  de  force  (critics  called  him  rash  in 
speech  though  sage  in  counsel)  but  it  was  due  more  largely 
to  a  deliberate  analysis  of  the  situation.  Hilliard,  whose  atti- 


90  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

tude  was  closely  similar  to  that  of  Toombs,  explained  his 
own  policy  saying  that  he  spoke  aggressively  in  Congress 
in  order  to  be  able  to  speak  soothingly  at  home.*  With 
Toombs  there  was  yet  another  reason.  Throughout  the 
winter  and  spring  he  had  believed  it  barely  within  human 
possibility  to  bring  the  House  as  then  constituted  to  any 
adjustment  which  he  thought  the  South  ought  to  accept. 
He  therefore  intended  by  his  speeches  not  only,  if  possible, 
to  persuade  the  North  to  abandon  its  aggressions,  but  also 
to  rouse  the  South  into  preparation  for  ultimate  recourses 
in  the  probable  event  of  the  North's  refusing  to  yield  the 
required  modicum  of  rights  to  the  South. 

When  the  improbable  was  achieved,  the  Compromise 
enacted,  it  became  apparent  that  a  large  element  of  the 
people  throughout  the  Lower  South  had  become  so  highly 
exercised  that  they  were  likely  to  repudiate  the  Compromise 
and  move  for  Southern  independence.  The  Toombs  group 
of  Congressmen  promptly  resolved  that  this  movement  must 
be  checked  and  controlled,  particularly  in  the  pivotal  state 
of  Georgia  where  the  crisis  was  at  the  time  nearest  a  cul 
mination. 

Secessionist  spirit  had  begun  to  emerge  in  Georgia,  as  in 
neighboring  states,  even  before  the  beginning  of  the  Proviso 
struggle.  For  instance  J.  W.  H.  Underwood,  a  leading  Demo 
crat  of  northern  Georgia,  wrote  to  Howell  Cobb,  February 
2,  1844: 

"  I  am  as  ardently  attached  to  our  Union  and  institutions 
as  any  man;  but  when  our  Northern  brethren,  forgetful  of 
the  spirit  of  compromise  which  resulted  in  the  formation  of 
our  Constitution  and  regardless  of  our  rights  as  members 
of  this  Union,  force  issues  upon  us  which  were  intended  by 
the  framers  of  our  government  to  be  buried  and  closed  for 
ever,  it  is  time  that  we  should  hold  them  as  we  hold  the  rest 
of  mankind,  'enemies  in  war,  in  peace  friends/  I  am  opposed 
to  any  temporizing  on  this  question." 

*  Congressional  Globe,  3ist.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  485. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  91 

Similar  expressions  in  the  next  three  or  four  years  have 
already  been  quoted  in  our  preceding  chapters.  On  Febru 
ary  13,  1849,  Hopkins  Holsey,  the  Democratic  editor  at 
Athens,  Ga.,  wrote  Cobb: 

"  The  Democratic  party  of  the  South  is  taking  position  in 
favor  of  bold  measures.  The  tone  of  the  press  is  conclusive 
and  without  exception,  even  in  the  mountains.  .  .  .  The 
Southern  people,  you  are  aware,  are  now  more  sensitive  than 
ever.  They  are  not  willing  to  give  up  the  substance  for  the 
shadow.  They  are  wrought  up,  by  the  late  movement  in 
Congress,  into  a  greater  jealousy  than  ever  of  their  rights.  .  .  . 
I  have  but  little  confidence  in  the  stability  of  the  Union, 
unless  the  South  succumbs  entirely  to  aggression.  This 
she  may  do,  but  I  do  not  think  she  will.  The  struggle  will 
be  great,  but  she  will  recover,  although  it  may  be  by  a  small 
majority  of  the  people  at  first.  And  now,  my  dear  friend, 
let  me  say  to  you  that  it  is  the  force  of  the  question  that  is 
sweeping  the  Democratic  ranks  at  the  South.  Neither  per 
sonal  hatreds  or  attachments  will  have  any  effect.  Men  will 
ally  on  this  question  with  their  most  bitter  personal  enemies, 
and  part  with  their  best  friends." 

In  South  Carolina  the  legislature  had  already  declared 
by  a  resolution  of  December  15,  1848,  "that  the  time  for 
discussion  has  passed,  and  that  this  General  Assembly  is 
prepared  to  cooperate  with  her  sister  states  in  resisting  the 
Wilmot  Proviso  ...  at  any  and  all  hazard."  The  develop 
ments  of  the  ensuing  year  brought  the  Georgia  legislature 
not  only  to  accept  an  invitation  to  send  delegates  to  a  South 
ern  convention  but  also  to  authorize  the  Governor  in  the 
event  of  the  enactment  by  Congress  of  either  of  the  pending 
objectionable  bills  to  summon  the  people  to  meet  by  dele 
gates  in  convention  to  consider  "the  mode  and  measure  of 
redress."  The  prevailing  view  which  led  to  this  action  was 
expressed  in  the  Georgia  Senate  by  the  young  mountaineer 
Joseph  E.  Brown,  now  just  entering  public  life,  who  was 
destined  to  reach  high  authority  in  the  state  because  of 
his  thorough  sympathy  with  the  views  of  the  yeomanry 


92  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  his  marked  integrity  and  sagacity.     As  reported  in  the 
local  press: 

"  He  said  the  time  had  arrived  when  the  South  must  either 
submit  to  aggression  or  resist,  regardless  of  consequences. 
He  regarded  the  Union  as  one  of  the  noblest  structures  ever 
built  by  human  hands;  but  much  as  he  revered  it,  he  would 
rather  see  it  sundered  than  that  the  South  should  be  deprived 
of  an  equal  participation  in  its  rights  and  privileges.  It 
was  framed  in  a  better  and  purer  age  than  that  in  which  we 
live,  at  a  time  when  every  state  held  slaves.  Massachusetts 
and  others  of  her  neighbors,  because  their  soil  and  climate 
did  not  render  them  profitable  to  their  owners,  sold  them  to 
the  South,  and  now  they  prate  liberally  about  our  iniquity 
in  holding  the  property  they  sold  to  us.  These  Northern 
people  to  show  their  aversion  to  slavery  have  determined  to 
exclude  it  from  territories  acquired  by  the  best  blood  of  the 
South.  ...  He  had  a  reverence  for  the  Union.  To  preserve 
it  he  would  yield  the  territory.  But  Southern  rights  could 
not  be  purchased  at  that  price.  Yield  that  and  you  will 
be  called  upon  to  yield  the  District  of  Columbia.  You  will 
then  be  told  this  is  a  small  matter.  That  forced  upon  you, 
you  must  next  surrender  the  arsenals  and  dock  yards.  These 
yielded,  the  internal  slave  trade  will  be  abolished.  By  the 
time  these  are  accomplished,  states  will  be  organized  in  the 
new  territories,  and  by  the  force  of  numbers  the  great  object 
of  all  these  movements  will  be  consummated  —  an  altera 
tion  of  the  Constitution  and  abolition  in  the  states.  Under 
these  circumstances  now  was  the  time  to  act  —  to  act  with 
reference  to  the  future  and  in  such  a  manner  as  the  conven 
tion  uninstructed  by  us  shall  determine."  * 

Congressmen  in  the  thick  of  the  fight  at  Washington 
labored  to  keep  in  touch  with  public  opinion  at  home,  with 
a  view  both  to  guiding  it  and  to  being  guided  by  it.  Stephens, 
for  example,  wrote,  February  13,  1850,  to  James  Thomas,  a 
leading  citizen  of  Sparta,  Ga.: 

"  When  I  look  to  the  future  and  consider  the  causes  of  the 
existing  sectional  discontent,  their  extent  and  nature,  I 

*  Federal  Union,  Feb.  5, 1850:  report  of  proceedings  in  the  Georgia  senate. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  93 

must  confess  that  I  see  very  little  prospect  of  future  peace 
and  quiet  in  the  public  mind  upon  this  subject.  Whether 
a  separation  of  the  Union  and  the  organization  and  establish 
ment  of  a  Southern  Confederacy  would  give  final  and  ulti 
mate  security  to  the  form  of  society  as  it  exists  with  us,  I 
am  not  prepared  to  say.  I  have  no  doubt  if  we  had  unity, 
virtue,  intelligence  and  patriotism  in  all  our  councils,  such 
an  experiment  might  succeed.  But  unfortunately  for  our 
country  at  this  time  we  have  if  I  am  not  mistaken  too  much 
demagogism  and  too  little  statesmanship.  Most  of  the  fight 
ing  resolves  of  our  legislatures  I  fear  are  nothing  but  gasconade, 
put  forth  by  partisan  leaders  for  partisan  effects.  If  our  peo 
ple  really  mean  to  fight,  if  their  minds  are  made  up  upon  this 
alternative,  they  should  say  so,  and  they  should  make  the  dec 
laration  in  Congress  too  plain  to  admit  of  equivocal  readings. 
But  if  they  do  not  intend  to  resort  to  the  ultima  ratio  of  all 
nations  they  should  cease  in  that  sort  of  braggadocio  which 
will  in  end  result  in  their  own  degradation." 

The  response  to  these  soundings  was  apparently  Delphic. 
Jefferson  Davis  doubtless  gathered  that  his  own  antagonism 
to  the  Compromise  would  be  supported  by  the  South,  while 
on  the  other  hand  Toombs,  Stephens  and  Cobb  found  reason 
to  believe  that  their  programme  of  belligerent  demands  for 
moderate  Northern  concessions  as  a  basis  of  maintaining 
the  Union  would  be  endorsed.  In  May  a  meeting  of  the 
Southern  delegation  in  Congress  authorized  the  issue  of  an 
address  to  the  Southern  people  prepared  by  a  committee 
with  Toombs  as  a  member,  advocating  the  establishment  of 
a  newspaper  at  Washington  devoted  to  the  promotion  of 
Southern  interests  and  the  unification  of  Southern  opinion. 
"The  union  of  the  South  upon  these  vital  interests,"  the 
address  declared,  "is  necessary  not  only  for  the  sake  of  the 
South,  but  perhaps  for  the  sake  of  the  Union."  *  Mean 
while  the  congressional  asperities  continued  and  the  public 
tended  more  and  more  to  the  opinion  expressed  by  Senator 
Hunter  of  Virginia,  that  the  Clay  proposals  involved  such 

*  M,  W.  Clusky,  Political  Text-book,  Phila.,  1860,  pp.  606-609. 


94  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT  TOOMBS 

great  concessions  by  the  South  that  their  adoption  would 
promote  further  aggressions  by  the  overpowering  North  and 
bring  not  peace  but  continued  strife.* 

In  the  early  summer  attention  was  diverted  in  part  to  the 
widely  heralded  Nashville  Convention,  in  which  delegates 
from  the  Southern  states  met  in  response  to  a  call  of  the 
Mississippi  legislature,  framed  in  accordance  with  a  plan 
devised  by  Calhoun  for  the  consolidation  of  Southern  opinion 
and  the  coordination  of  Southern  policies.  But  the  Southern 
Whigs  declined  to  support  the  project;  and  when  the  conven 
tion  assembled  such  wide  divergence  of  views  appeared  among 
its  members  that  the  unifying  of  the  South  upon  any  decisive 
policy  was  recognized  as  impossible.  The  convention  merely 
adopted  a  demand  for  the  extension  of  the  Missouri  Com 
promise  line  to  the  Pacific,  together  with  a  long  series  of  very 
mild  resolutions,  and  adjourned  to  await  the  action  of  Con 
gress  upon  the  questions  pending. 

In  Georgia  the  people  were  looking  more  to  Congress  and 
to  their  state  convention  in  prospect  than  to  the  Nashville 
gathering.  The  condition  of  affairs  in  midsummer  is  indicated 
by  a  letter  of  Absalom  H.  Chappell,  a  leading  Unionist 
Democrat  of  central  Georgia,  to  Howell  Cobb,  July  10,  1850: 

"  The  state  of  things  is  such  as  is  filling  thousands  of  the 
best  men  in  Georgia  with  deep  alarm.  The  Democratic 
party  of  this  section  of  the  state  is  becoming  rapidly  demoral 
ized  in  reference  to  the  great  question  of  the  preservation 
of  the  Union.  The  game  of  the  destructives  is  to  use  the 
Missouri  Compromise  principle  as  a  medium  of  defeating 
all  adjustment  and  then  make  the  most  of  succeeding 
events,  no  matter  what  they  may  be,  to  infuriate  the  South 
and  drive  her  into  measures  that  must  end  in  disifnion.  .  .  . 
It  is  of  the  very  last  importance  that  you  should  without 
delay  throw  yourself  fully  into  the  breach  by  an  address  to 
your  constituents.  Prepare,  I  beseech  you,  and  send  out  at 

*  In  Senate,  July  18,  1850.  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  3ist.  Cong., 
ist.  sess.,  p.  382. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  95 

once  such  an  address.  ...  It  will  do  incalculable  good,  and 
what  is  more,  prevent  incalculable  and  irremediable  evil. 
...  If  any  other  Representative  or  Senator  from  Georgia, 
Whig  or  Democrat,  can  be  prevailed  on  to  come  out  with  an 
address  to  the  people  in  behalf  of  any  course  of  compromise, 
pacification  and  adjustment  that  is  not  hopeless  of  being 
passed,  he  will  be  rendering  the  country  greater  service  than 
he  has  ever  before  had  the  opportunity  of  rendering." 

On  July  21  John  H.  Lumpkin  wrote  Cobb  in  similar  strain 
from  Rome,  Ga.:  "Wm.  L.  Mitchell  and  various  other 
prominent  individuals  I  have  met  are  in  favor  of  a  dissolu 
tion  of  the  Union  per  se  (as  I  understand  Uncle  Jos.  H. 
Lumpkin  has  written  you  he  is),  and  newspaper  editors  have 
become  bold  enough  to  insert  communications  in  their 
columns  without  any  mark  of  disapprobation,  openly  advo 
cating  an  immediate  dissolution  of  the  Union." 

Mass-meetings  at  numerous  places  in  Georgia  listened 
with  approval  to  speeches  on  the  infraction  of  Southern 
rights  and  the  obligation  of  resistance  from  Rhett  of  South 
Carolina,  Yancey  of  Alabama,  and  Charles  J.  McDonald 
of  Georgia.* 

Governor  Towns,  in  sympathy  with  the  resistance  policy, 
only  awaited  the  occurrence  of  an  opportunity  to  call  the 
contemplated  Georgia  convention.  The  enactment  of  the 
California  bill,  falling  within  the  measures  listed  for  resist 
ance  in  the  legislature's  act  of  February  8,  gave  the  governor 
the  authority  he  desired;  and  on  September  23  he  issued 
a  proclamation  directing  the  citizens  to  elect  delegates, 
November  3,  to  a  convention  to  meet  at  Milledgeville  on 
December  10,  vested  with  unlimited  authority. 

Such  was  the  situation  into  which  Toombs,  Stephens  and 
Cobb  plunged  as  soon  as  the  adjournment  of  Congress  at 
the  end  of  September  permitted  them  to  hasten  home.  No 
one  could  tell  the  outcome  of  the  pending  decisive  contest. 

*  J.  C.  Butler,  Historical  Record  of  Macon,  Ga.,  Macon,  1879,  p.  194. 


96  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

The  three  men,  in  a  firm  alliance  for  combining  their  strength 
in  persuading  the  people  to  endorse  the  settlement  which 
they  had  just  wrung  from  the  reluctant  Congress,  began  a 
whirlwind  campaign  on  the  stump. 

To  supplement  their  speeches  Toombs  issued  on  October 
9  a  printed  address  to  the  people  declaring  that  no  act 
injurious  to  the  South  had  been  passed  by  Congress  and 
urging  that  Georgia  and  the  South  stand  by  the  Constitu 
tion  and  the  laws  in  good  faith  until  a  wrong  had  been  con 
summated.  Admitting  that  the  South  had  not  secured  its 
full  contention,  he  said  in  palliation:  "But  the  fugitive-slave 
law  which  I  demanded  was  granted.  The  abolition  of  slavery 
in  the  District  of  Columbia  and  proscription  in  the  terri 
tories  was  defeated,  crushed  and  abandoned.  We  have 
firmly  established  great  and  important  principles.  The 
South  has  compromised  no  right,  surrendered  no  principle, 
and  lost  not  an  inch  of  ground  in  this  great  contest.  I  did 
not  hesitate  to  accept  these  acts  but  gave  them  my  ready 
support."  He  appealed  to  all  men  of  integrity,  intellect 
and  courage,  regardless  of  prior  political  affiliations,  to  come 
to  the  support  of  the  Constitution  and  the  Union.  "With 
no  memory  of  past  differences,"  he  concluded,  "I  am  ready 
to  unite  with  any  portion  or  all  of  my  countrymen  in  defense 
of  the  republic."  * 

On  election  day  the  voters  went  to  the  polls  in  unusually 
great  numbers  throughout  the  state,  and  elected  a  huge 
majority  of  Unionists  as  delegates,  including  Toombs, 
Stephens  and  Cobb  from  their  respective  counties.  There 
upon  these  leaders  set  themselves  to  determine  how  the 
occasion  might  best  be  used  for  exerting  a  proper  influence 
upon  neighboring  states  and  upon  coming  years.  They 
desired  to  combine  in  the  breasts  of  the  people  an  ac 
ceptance  of  the  adjustment  accomplished  and  a  resolution 
to  repel  any  further  Northern  aggressions.  To  this  end 
*  P.  A.  Stovall,  Robert  Toombs,  pp.  83-85. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  97 

they  encouraged  their  ally  Charles  J.  Jenkins  to  prepare 
and  present  to  the  convention  in  December,  as  chairman  of 
the  principal  committee,  a  report  concluding  with  a  set  of 
resolutions.  The  latter  were  adopted  by  the  immense 
majority  of  237  to  19,  and  promptly  became  celebrated  as 
the  "  Georgia  Platform." 

In  the  report,  recent  developments  regarding  the  slavery 
issue  were  reviewed  and  the  conclusion  reached  that  the 
admission  of  California  was  the  only  thing  done  by  Congress 
which  the  resolutions  authorizing  the  call  of  this  conven 
tion  had  declared  would  be  taken  by  Georgia  as  a  grievance. 
The  question  was  then  discussed  as  to  the  policy  proper  in  the 
premises: 

"  The  proposition  that,  weighed  in  the  scale  of  interest,  the 
preponderance  is  vastly  on  the  side  of  non-resistance,  is  too 
plain  for  argument.  This  act  being  in  its  nature  unsuscep 
tible  of  repeal,  the  only  competent  measure  of  resistance  is 
secession.  This  would  not  repair  the  loss  sustained,  viz., 
deprivation  of  the  right  to  introduce  slavery  into  California. 
But  it  would  subject  Georgia,  first  to  the  additional  loss  of  all 
she  has  gained  by  the  scheme  of  adjustment,  e.  g.,  the  pro 
vision  for  the  reclamation  of  fugitive  slaves;  and  secondly 
it  would  annihilate  forever  all  the  advantages,  foreign  and 
domestic,  derivable  from  her  adherence  to  the  confederacy." 

On  the  other  hand  consideration  was  given  to  the  current 
Northern  agitation  for  the  repeal  of  the  new  fugitive-slave 
law,  and  the  assertion  was  made  that  the  repeal  or  the 
wholesale  obstruction  of  this  law,  since  it  would  nullify 
the  clause  in  the  Constitution  which  required  the  main 
tenance  of  an  efficient  rendition  system,  would  thence 
forward  be  made  a  test  of  the  Northern  disposition  regarding 
the  obligations  of  the  Constitution.  After  further  recitals 
and  arguments  upon  other  topics,  the  report  concluded  with 
the  resolutions  comprising  the  "Georgia  Platform,"  which 
was  adopted,  "to  the  end  that  the  position  of  this  state 
may  be  clearly  apprehended  by  her  confederates  of  the 


98  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

South  and  of  the  North,  and  that  she  may  be  blameless  of 
all  future  consequences." 

The  first  of  these  resolutions  was  a  pledge  to  abide  in  the 
Union  so  long  as  it  should  continue  to  be  a  safeguard  of  the 
rights  and  principles  which  it  had  been  designed  to  perpetu 
ate.  The  second  endorsed  the  general  principle  of  com 
promise.  The  third  said  that  the  state  of  Georgia,  though 
not  wholly  approving  the  recent  congressional  compromise, 
"will  abide  by  it  as  a  permanent  adjustment  of  this  sectional 
controversy."  The  fourth  declared  that  Georgia  ought  to 
and  would  resist,  even  to  the  disruption  of  the  Union  as 
a  last  resort,  any  future  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District 
of  Columbia,  or  prohibition  of  it  in  the  territories  of  Utah 
and  New  Mexico,  or  any  suppression  of  the  interstate 
slave-trade,  or  the  repeal  or  emasculation  of  the  fugitive- 
slave  rendition  law,  or  a  refusal  to  admit  any  territory  as  a 
state  because  of  the  existence  of  slavery  therein.  The 
fifth  and  final  resolution  repeated  the  emphasis  upon  slave 
rendition:  "It  is  the  deliberate  opinion  of  this  convention 
that  upon  the  faithful  execution  of  the  fugitive-slave  bill 
depends  the  preservation  of  our  much  loved  Union."  * 

In  the  preceding  month  of  November  the  Nashville  Con 
vention  had  reassembled  in  a  somewhat  irregular  manner 
for  its  adjourned  session,  and  with  McDonald  of  Georgia 
as  its  president  adopted  resolutions  rejecting  the  Compro 
mise  and  appealing  to  the  Southern  states  to  provide  for  a 
joint  convention  clothed  with  full  power  to  restore  the  rights 
of  the  South  within  the  Union  if  possible,  "and  if  not,  to 
provide  for  their  safety  and  independence."  f  But  the  tide 
of  public  sentiment  had  already  been  turned  against  dis 
union  in  Georgia  by  the  Toombs,  Stephens  and  Cobb 
campaign;  and  the  Georgia  Platform  began  promptly  in 

*  Journal  of  the  Convention;  Clusky,  Political  Text-book,  1860,  pp.  599, 
600;  Stephens,  War  Between  the  States,  II,  676,  677;  Johnston  and  Browne, 
Life  of  Stephens,  p.  259.  f  Clusky,  Political  Text-book,  pp.  596-598. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  99 

December  to  exert  a  decisive  influence  upon  opinion  in 
nearly  all  the  neighboring  states. 

The  work  of  the  Georgia  convention  was  clearly  not  the 
result  of  the  efforts  of  either  of  the  political  parties,  but  of 
a  coalition  comprised  of  nearly  all  the  Whigs  and  a  strong 
division  of  the  Democrats  led  by  Howell  Cobb  and  located 
chiefly  in  the  northern  counties.  The  irreconcilables  on 
the  other  hand  comprised  a  majority  of  the  Democrats.  It 
appears,  then,  that  each  party  had  in  large  measure  reversed 
its  position  regarding  the  rights  of  the  South  since  the  time 
of  the  Nullification  controversy.  Yet  the  contentions  of 
the  friends  and  foes  of  the  Georgia  Platform  in  1850  were 
not  radically  different.  Virtually  all  Georgians  believed 
that  the  rights  of  the  South  had  been  invaded.  Opinion 
differed  merely  upon  the  advisability  of  belligerence  under 
the  existing  circumstances. 

Although  the  Platform  was  adopted  in  the  convention  by 
an  overwhelming  majority,  it  was  realized  that  there  existed 
strong  popular  disapproval  of  any  semblance  of  a  sacrifice 
of  Southern  rights.  The  necessity  was  felt  for  an  organiza 
tion  which  would  uphold  firmly  the  principles  of  the 
Compromise.  There  was  therefore  held  on  the  night  of 
December  12,  1850,  between  the  daily  sessions  of  the  con 
vention,  a  meeting  of  the  prominent  unionist  members  of 
that  body,  at  which  it  was  resolved  that  party  alignments 
as  then  existing  were  illogical  and  hurtful  to  the  country, 
and  should  be  destroyed.  At  that  meeting  a  new  political 
party  was  launched,  with  Toombs,  Stephens  and  Cobb 
responsible  for  its  origin.  The  name  "Constitutional 
Union"  was  assumed,  the  Georgia  Platform  was  adopted 
as  the  basis  of  the  party's  policy,  and  all  friends  of  the  Union 
were  invited  to  the  support  of  the  movement.*  Toombs 

*  U.  B.  Phillips,  Georgia  and  State  Rights,  pp.  165,  166;  A.  H.  Stephens, 
War  Between  the  States,  II,  176;  Southern  Recorder,  Dec.  24,  1850,  and  Feb. 
24,  1853;  Federal  Union,  Jan.  21,  1851. 


100  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  Stephens  did  not  return  to  Washington  for  the  short 
session  of  Congress  until  late  in  December.  For  most 
of  the  following  year  they  and  Cobb  devoted  the  greater 
part  of  their  attention  to  the  new  party's  progress,  endeavor 
ing  to  promote  it  in  other  states  as  well  as  in  Georgia. 

Washington's  birthday,  1851,  was  made  the  occasion  for 
a  great  constitutional  union  celebration  at  Macon,  Ga.,  at 
which  Absalom  H.  Chappell,  A.  H.  Kenan,  E.  A.  Nisbet, 
R.  R.  Cuyler,  Washington  Poe,  C.  B.  Cole  and  A.  P.  Powers 
made  unionist  addresses;  letters  were  read  from  Clay,  Cobb, 
Toombs  and  numerous  others  who  had  had  to  decline  invita 
tions  to  attend;  and  a  long  series  of  regular  and  volunteer 
toasts  were  offered,  of  which  the  following  are  typical: 
"4.  A  Constitutional  Union  Party:  The  only  effectual 
organization  which  can  destroy  abolitionism  at  the  North 
and  disunion  at  the  South.  ...  5.  The  Union  Party  of 
Georgia:  It  has  blotted  out  all  past  party  distinctions  and 
declared  that  it  will  fraternize  only  with  those  who  occupy 
the  broad  platform  adopted  by  the  Georgia  Convention. 
The  main  test  of  all  candidates  should  be,  are  they  honest? 
are  they  capable?  are  they  faithful  to  the  Constitution  and 
the  Union?"* 

Toombs's  letter  to  the  committee  for  this  meeting,  dated 
at  Washington,  D.C.,  February  15,  reads  in  part  as  follows: 

"The  present  government  of  the  United  States  [i.e.  Fill- 
more's  administration]  is  true  to  its  duties  and  to  the  laws 
and  constitution  of  the  land;  it  will  maintain  them  with  a 
firmness  equal  to  any  emergency,  with  a  constancy  and 
courage  as  prolonged  as  the  conflict. 

"The  existing  political  organizations  of  the  North,  both 
Whig  and  Democratic,  are  wholly  unequal  to  the  present 
crisis.  Their  antecedents  are  continual  stumbling-blocks 
in  the  path  of  safety  and  duty.  If  either  were  sound,  I 
should  not  hesitate  to  advise  you  to  promote  its  success. 

*  Union  Celebration  in  Macon,  Georgia,  on  the  anniversary  of  Washing 
ton's  Birthday,  February  22,  1851.  (Caption.) 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM 

But  both  have  degenerated  into  mere  factions,  adhering 
together  by  the  common  hope  of  public  plunder.  Their 
success  would  benefit  nobody  but  themselves,  and  would  be 
infinitely  mischievous  to  the  public  weal.  The  Whigs  and 
Democrats  of  Massachusetts  are  struggling  between  Sumner 
and  Winthrop;  it  is  a  contest  in  which  the  friends  of  the 
country  have  not  the  slightest  interest.  The  success  of 
the  principles  of  either  would  be  equally  fatal  to  the  safety 
and  existence  of  the  republic.  The  Whigs  and  Democrats 
of  New  York  and  Ohio  are  thoroughly  denationalized.  Indeed 
there  is  no  non-slaveholding  state  in  which  the  free-soil 
Whigs  do  not  control  the  Whig  organization,  and  none  in 
which  the  Democratic  free-soilers  do  not  control  it,  except 
N.  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Iowa.  Our 
safety,  and  the  safety  of  the  country,  therefore,  lies  in 
refusing  all  cooperation  with  either  the  Whig  or  Democratic 
parties  of  the  North,  and  a  thorough  union  with  the  sound 
men  of  both  these  parties  into  a  united  National  party.  If 
this  is  impracticable,  we  ought  to  stand  aloof  from  both 
and  support  none  but  a  sound  National  candidate. 

"Apart  from  the  question  of  slavery,  another  great  ques 
tion  is  rising  up  before  us  [to]  become  a  i fixed  fact'  in 
American  politics.  It  is  ...  sometimes  called  the  higher 
law,  in  antagonism  to  our  constitutional  compact.  If  the 
first  succeeds  we  have  no  other  safety  except  in  secession; 
if  the  latter  *  liberty  and  union'  may  be  *  forever  one  and 
inseparable/  In  all  these  questions  it  is  our  true  policy  to 
stand  by  those  who  agree  with  us  —  repudiate  those  who 
differ  with  us.  We  are  beleaguered  by  enemies  at  the 
North  and  the  South.  Let  us  not  falter  in  our  duty.  The 
constitution  and  Union  is  worth  the  struggle.  Who  will 
falter  in  this  glorious  conflict?" 

An  undertone  of  apprehension  is  discernible  in  this  letter. 
Toombs  was  nevertheless  resolved  to  give  the  Compromise 
a  full  trial  as  a  means  of  saving  the  Union,  and  to  have  no 
share  in  the  responsibility  should  it  fail.  The  opposing  view 
was  cogently  expressed  in  an  editorial  of  the  preceding  month 
in  the  Columbus,  Ga.,  Sentinel: 

"There  is  a  feud  between  the  North  and  the  South  which 
may  be  smothered,  but  never  overcome.  They  are  at  issue 


':T;HE  xiFE  OF  ROBERT  TOOMBS 

upon  principles  as  dear  and  lasting  as  life  itself.  Reason 
as  we  may,  or  humbug  as  we  choose,  there  is  no  denying  the 
fact  that  the  institutions  of  the  South  are  the  cause  of  this 
sectional  controversy,  and  never  until  these  institutions  are 
destroyed,  or  there  is  an  end  to  the  opposition  of  the  North 
to  their  existence,  can  there  be  any  lasting  and  genuine 
settlement  between  the  parties.  We  may  purchase,  as  we 
have  done  in  this  instance,  a  temporary  exemption  from 
wrong  by  a  course  of  compromise  and  concession;  but  we 
had  as  soon  think  of  extirpating  a  malady  by  attacking  its 
symptoms  as  to  hope  for  a  final  adjustment  of  our  difficulties. 
The  evil  is,  Northern  interference  with  the  Southern  institu 
tions,  an  interference  that  is  legalized  by  and  grows  out  of 
our  political  connection  with  our  enemies.  .  .  .  Does  any 
man  of  common  intelligence  at  the  South  entertain  the 
remotest  idea  that  our  brethren  will  ever  become  more 
tolerant  of  our  institutions  ?  Will  they  ever  cease  their  war 
upon  them?  .  .  .  Let  no  Southern  man  be  deceived:  a 
momentary  quiet  has  hushed  the  voice  of  agitation;  but 
there  is  no  peace.  There  can  be  none  as  long  as  slaveholders 
and  abolitionists  live  under  a  common  government.  The 
world  is  wide  enough  for  us  and  them;  let  them  go  to  the 
right  and  we  to  the  left,  for  we  may  no  longer  dwell  together 
as  brethren."  * 

Toombs  might  very  well  have  adopted  the  reasoning  of 
this  editorial  a  year  or  two  earlier  and  have  based  his  policy 
upon  it.  If  the  great  sectional  conflict  was  Indeed  irrepres 
sible  (and  no  man  could  then  nor  can  any  man  now  nor 
hereafter  be  sure  that  it  was  by  human  means  avoidable) 
wisdom  required  that  the  South  should  hasten  the  issue. 
The  policy  of  Rhett,  Yancey  and  Quitman  was  quite  possi 
bly  the  wisest  for  the  South  to  adopt.  Stephens  said  in 
after  years  that  he  would  have  advocated  extreme  measure 
of  resistance  in  1851  except  that  he  did  not  believe  the 
people  could  be  made  unanimous  in  its  support  nor  that  their 
leaders  were  sufficiently  statesmanlike. f  Toombs  was  doubt- 

*  Reprinted  in  the  Charleston  Mercury,  Jan.  23,  1851. 

t  Johnston  and  Browne,  Lift  of  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  p.  265. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  103 

less  influenced  by  the  same  thoughts,  and  furthermore 
he  considered  himself  pledged  in  good  faith  to  exert  all  his 
power  to  make  the  Compromise  a  success  —  in  the  phrase 
of  the  period,  a  finality.  By  1851,  in  fact,  even  the  opponents 
of  the  Compromise  in  Georgia  recognized  that  the  moment 
had  passed  when  the  people  might  possibly  have  been 
committed  to  secession;  and  when  in  the  spring  they 
organized  the  Southern  Rights  party  to  do  battle  with  the 
Constitutional  Union  party,  their  spokesmen  disavowed 
secessionist  purpose. 

In  June  Cobb  and  McDonald  were  nominated  as  the  rival 
candidates  for  the  governorship,  and  the  people  were  regaled 
with  a  series  of  joint  debates  between  them.  Stephens  was 
kept  out  of  the  campaign  by  illness,  but  Toombs  fairly 
excelled  himself,  spurred  as  he  was  by  the  prospect  of  his 
own  election  to  the  United  States  Senate  in  case  the  Con 
stitutional  Union  party  should  secure  a  majority  of  the 
legislature  elected  at  the  same  time  as  the  governor.  His 
ringing  speeches  in  the  campaign  were  such  as  to  be  long 
remembered  by  the  people.  His  task  was  to  reverse  the 
tide  which  had  been  stimulated  by  his  own  alarmist  utter 
ances  in  Congress  during  the  preceding  year;  and  for  just 
such  a  task  his  talents  were  best  suited.  When  his  audiences 
were  quiet  and  thoughtful  he  demonstrated  by  solid  reason 
ing  that  his  congressional  speeches  and  his  present  advocacy 
were  parts  of  a  single  consistent  purpose.  But  where,  as 
at  Lexington,  Ga.,  he  was  met  in  joint  debate  by  an  ad 
versary  who  shrewdly  rehearsing  Toombs's  "Hamilcar" 
speech  and  showing  its  points  of  opposition  to  the  argument 
which  Toombs  had  just  concluded  on  the  platform,  roused 
a  furor  of  endorsement  in  the  audience,  Toombs  rose  to  the 
height  of  his  splendid  audacity  before  the  mob.  He  re 
minded  his  hearers  that  their  whole  duty  was  to  decide 
whether  they  would  approve  the  Compromise  and  the 
Georgia  Platform  or  not;  and  that  to  discuss  whether  what 


104  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

he  had  spoken  last  year,  before  these  measures  were  even 
thought  of,  was  right  or  wrong,  was  to  substitute  for  a 
transcendently  important  public  question  a  little  personal 
one  of  no  concern  to  them  whatever.  "If  there  is  anything 
in  my  Hamilcar  speech  that  cannot  be  reconciled  with  the 
measures  which  I  have  supported  here  today  with  reasons 
which  my  opponent  confesses  by  his  silence  he  cannot 
answer,  I  repudiate  it.  If  the  gentleman  takes  up  my 
abandoned  errors,  let  him  defend  them."  Colonel  Reed 
who  related  this  episode  in  his  Brothers'  War,  went  on  to  say: 

"I  heard  much  of  this  day,  still  famous  in  all  the  locality, 
when  six  years  afterwards  I  settled  in  Lexington  .  .  . 
Over  and  over  again  the  union  men  told  how  their  spirits 
fell,  fell,  fell  as  the  southern-rights  speaker  kept  on,  until 
it  looked  black  and  dark  around;  and  then  how  the  sun  broke 
out  in  full  splendor  at  the  first  sentence  of  Toombs's  reply, 
and  the  brightness  mounted  steadily  to  the  end.  That 
sentence  last  quoted  is  a  proverb  in  that  region  yet.  If  in 
a  dispute  with  anybody  you  try  to  put  him  down  by  quoting 
his  former  contradictory  utterances,  he  tells  you  that  if  you 
take  up  his  abandoned  errors  you  must  defend  them.  The 
interest  excited  in  me  by  what  is  told  of  the  foregoing  was  the 
beginning  of  my  study  of  Toombs  which  never  at  any  time 
entirely  ceased,  and  which  will  doubtless  continue  as  long  as 
I  live.  He  has  impressed  me  far  more  than  any  other  man 
whom  I  ever  knew."  * 

The  results  at  the  polls  in  October  showed  a  sweeping 
Unionist  victory.  Cobb  was  elected  by  the  very  unusual 
majority  of  18,000  votes.  Toombs  himself  was  reflected  to 
Congress  and  a  large  majority  of  Unionists  was  sent  to 
each  branch  of  the  assembly.  The  Southern  Rights  ticket 
received  only  the  support  of  the  main  body  of  the  Democrats 
in  central  and  southern  Georgia.  The  Democrats  of  the 
mountainous  northern  counties  combined  with  nearly  all 
the  Whigs  throughout  the  state  for  the  Unionist  victory. 

*  J.  C.  Reed,  The  Brothers'  War,  pp.  215-217. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  105 

Upon  the  convening  of  the  legislature  in  November  one 
of  the  first  items  of  business  was  the  election  of  a  Senator 
to  succeed  John  McPherson  Berrien,  whose  term  was  to 
expire  in  1853.  Berrien,  though  still  reputed  to  be  the 
ablest  constitutional  lawyer  in  Congress,  had  long  passed 
his  prime  and  was  poorly  adapted  for  the  stress  of  the 
sectional  strife.  In  chagrin  at  learning  that  his  course 
in  the  struggle  for  the  Compromise  was  disapproved  by  the 
people  of  the  state,  he  first  declined  to  be  a  candidate  for 
reelection,  and  then  on  the  eve  of  the  ballot  he  informed  his 
friends  that  he  would  accept  if  elected.  Stephens  also,  it 
may  be  inferred,  had  a  desire  for  the  place;  and  though, 
possibly  because  of  illness,  he  did  not  enter  the  contest,  he 
appears  to  have  felt  for  years  afterward  a  slight  grievance 
that  he  had  not  been  preferred.  In  the  Unionist  caucus 
on  the  senatorship,  November  9,  Toombs  received  73  votes. 
Next  day  in  the  joint  ballot  of  the  houses  50  votes  were 
scattered  among  numerous  aspirants  while  Toombs  received 
the  remaining  120  and  was  elected.*  His  term  was  to  run 
for  six  years  from  March  4,  1853.  In  the  intervening  period 
he  of  course  continued  his  service  in  the  House. 

Meanwhile  the  secessionist  tide  had  been  stemmed  or 
was  about  to  be  stemmed  in  the  other  three  states  where  the 
agitation  had  been  strongest.  In  Alabama  Hilliard  in  the 
congressional  campaign  had  established  to  the  popular 
satisfaction  the  expediency  of  agreeing  to  the  Compromise, 
and  heavily  defeated  Yancey's  ticket  at  the  polls. f  In 
Mississippi  Foote's  campaign  in  1851  decided  the  issue  to 
similar  effect  by  securing  his  own  election  over  Davis  to 
the  governorship  and  the  election  of  a  majority  of  unionists 
to  the  state  convention  which  had  been  called.  In  South 

*  Federal  Union,  Nov.  n,  1851;  P.  A.  Stovall,  Robert  Toombs,  pp. 
94-96. 

t  G.  F.  Mellen,  "Henry  W.  Hilliard  and  W.  L.  Yancey,"  in  the  Sewanee 
Review,  XVII,  32-50. 


io6  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Carolina  the  legislature  in  1851  had  appropriated  $350,000 
for  putting  the  state  into  military  preparedness  and  had 
summoned  a  convention  to  take  authoritative  action.  When 
this  convention  met  in  the  spring  of  1852  nearly  all  of  its 
members  proved  to  be  advocates  of  secession,  though  a 
large  majority  favored  a  delay  until  the  cooperation  of 
other  states  could  be  secured.  The  convention  adopted  a 
resolution  that  the  state's  grievances  would  amply  justify 
secession,  but  that  "  from  considerations  of  expediency  only" 
"  she  forbears  the  exercise  of  this  manifest  right;"  whereupon 
Rhett,  who  was  then  a  Senator  from  South  Carolina,  resigned 
his  seat  in  disgust.*  The  secession  movement  of  the  late 
forties  and  early  fifties  was  definitely  at  an  end. 

No  sooner  had  Cobb's  election  as  governor  been  accom 
plished  than  the  Constitutional  Unionists  in  Georgia  were 
confronted  by  the  problem  of  party  alignments.  They 
had  repudiated  the  names  of  Whig  and  Democrat  in  the  hope 
of  developing  a  country-wide  Constitutional  Union  party 
from  the  Georgia  nucleus.  But  politicians'  love  of  spoils 
blighted  this  hope.  At  the  opening  of  Congress  in  December, 
when  a  new  House  was  to  be  organized,  both  Whigs  and 
Democrats  resorted  to  subterfuge  and  avoided  the  question 
of  party  endorsement  of  the  Compromise.  In  the  election 
of  the  Speaker  Toombs  and  Stephens  were  obliged  to  waste 
their  votes  among  the  scattering.  In  the  following  months 
Toombs  and  Stephens,  assisted  by  Foote  in  the  Senate, 
labored  for  the  promotion  of  their  policy,  but  with  no  avail. 

Before  the  spring  of  1852  when  the  problem  of  alignment 
for  the  presidential  campaign  loomed  large,  the  Southern 
Rights  party  in  Georgia  reverted  to  its  Democratic  alle 
giance  and  began  to  assert  that  such  Democrats  as  had  joined 
the  Constitutional  Union  organization  were  bolters  who  must 
serve  a  probation  in  humility  before  they  might  regain  full 

*  Journal  of  the  Convention;  Federal  Union,  May  18,  1852,  reprinting 
documents  from  South  Carolinian. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  107 

Democratic  fellowship.  As  to  the  Whig  party,  the  Con 
stitutional  Unionists  would  find  no  opposition  to  their 
return  to  fellowship;  but  the  party  at  large  had  become 
so  weakened,  so  largely  controlled  by  its  free-soil  wing, 
and  so  nearly  disrupted,  that  it  offered  little  attraction  to 
Southerners.  But  the  Constitutional  Unionists  would 
clearly  have  no  chance  for  success  with  an  independent 
presidential  ticket;  and  should  they  hold  aloof  from  the 
Whig  and  Democratic  conventions  they  would  lose  all 
opportunity  for  influencing  the  platforms  and  nominations. 
The  Democratic  branch  of  the  Constitutional  Unionists 
tried  for  some  weeks  to  persuade  the  whole  Constitutional 
Union  organization  to  join  in  sending  a  delegation  to  the 
Democratic  convention  at  Baltimore;  but  this  would  be 
merely  to  pull  Cobb's  chestnuts  out  of  the  fire  for  him,  and 
Toombs  and  Stephens  declined.  W.  H.  Hull  of  Athens, 
Ga.,  described  the  situation  from  the  Cobb  group's  point 
of  view  in  a  letter  to  Cobb,  February  14,  1852: 

"The  old  Whig  feeling  is  stronger  here  than  anywhere  I 
know.  We  have  had  to  keep  every  Democrat  in  the  back 
ground  heretofore;  and  I  have  no  hope  of  bringing  them  into 
the  Baltimore  movement  unless  there  is  a  general  acquies 
cence  elsewhere.  There  is  at  present  a  very  strong  feeling 
here  against  it,  and  I  believe  there  will  be  a  break  up  when 
ever  it  is  broached.  Foster  had  a  letter  from  Stephens 
which  he  read  us.  Stephens  is  dead  out  against  the  whole 
movement.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  Toombs;  but 
if  he  is  going  with  us  he  ought  to  come  out  and  say  so  very 
soon.  If  he  is  with  Stephens  it  is  useless  to  talk  about 
keeping  any  considerable  portion  of  our  Whig  strength. 
The  question  will  then  arise,  ' Where  are  we  to  go?'  I  am 
now  satisfied  from  the  course  things  are  taking  that  a  Union 
party  (which  I  have  fondly  hoped  would  be  organized)  is 
out  of  the  question.  We  cannot  become  Whigs  —  that  is 
absurd  —  then  we  must  be  Democrats.  If  the  Whigs  would 
go  with  us  and  be  Democrats,  it  would  all  be  well.  We  would 
keep  up  our  Union  organization  and  could  govern  the  policy 
of  Georgia  and  act  in  full  fellowship  with  the  national 


108  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Democracy.  But  I  suppose  the  Whigs  will  break  off. 
Then  I  say  we  must  fall  back  on  the  Democratic  line,  and 
of  course  act  with  those  who  are  with  us.  If  this  be  sound, 
then  why  have  two  delegations  to  Baltimore?  Why  weaken 
the  Democratic  party  by  divisions  and  strife,  and  give 
over  the  state  to  the  Whigs  ?  In  plain  terms  —  if  we  are 
to  be  Democrats,  why  not  be  Democrats,  and  let  past 
quarrels  be  forgotten  ? " 

On  March  5  E.  W.  Chastain  as  the  spokesman  of  the  Cobb 
element  in  Congress  read  a  speech  in  the  House  claiming 
regular  Democratic  standing  for  the  Union  Democrats  of 
Georgia  and  pledging  them  to  send  delegates  to  the  national 
Democratic  convention  and  abide  by  its  actions.*  This  was 
taken  to  indicate  a  split  of  Cobb  from  Toombs  and  Stephens.f 
The  rift  was  not  completed  however  for  several  months. 
Neither  the  Cobb  following,  nicknamed  Tugalo  Democrats 
from  their  location  in  north-eastern  Georgia  where  the 
Tugalo  river  is  the  boundary  of  the  state,  nor  the  Whigs 
were  able  to  end  their  indecision  in  the  campaign  until  late 
in  the  summer.  A  convention  of  Southern  Rights  men, 
claiming  to  represent  the  whole  of  the  regular  Democracy 
in  Georgia,  met  at  Milledgeville  on  March  31  and  appointed 
delegates  to  Baltimore.  On  April  22  and  23  a  convention 
of  the  Constitutional  Union  party  at  the  same  place  gave 
occasion  for  a  stormy  debate  among  its  members  over  a 
proposal  to  send  delegates  on  behalf  of  that  party  to  the 
same  Baltimore  Democratic  convention.  James  Jackson 
and  A.  H.  Kenan  supported  this  proposal,  which  was  opposed 
by  Thomas  W.  Thomas,  Charles  J.  Jenkins  and  others,  t 
The  convention  adjourned  after  adopting  a  noncommittal 
resolution,  whereupon  the  Tugalo  wing  appointed  a  delega 
tion  to  Baltimore  on  its  own  behalf.  Shortly  afterward 
came  news  of  the  disruption  of  the  congressional  caucus  of 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix  32d.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  255-258. 
t  Federal  Union,  March  16,  1852. 
t  Federal  Union,  April  27,  1852. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  109 

the  Whigs  over  a  "finality  resolution "  proposed  by  the 
Southerners  and  rejected  by  the  Northern  majority.  The 
nomination  by  the  Whig  national  convention  of  Scott, 
the  candidate  of  the  anti-slavery  wing,  now  seemed  almost 
inevitable.  As  a  forlorn  hope  for  perpetuating  the  national 
Whig  party  some  of  the  old-line  Whigs  held  a  small  con 
vention  at  Milledgeville  on  June  7  and  appointed  a  delega 
tion  to  the  general  Whig  convention  with  instructions  to 
support  Fillmore.  In  this  movement  Toombs  and  Stephens 
were  not  consulted.  In  fact  they  were  then  disposed  to 
consider  that  the  Whig  machinery  was  controlled  by  the 
anti-slavery  wing  beyond  the  hope  of  redemption,  and 
preferred  Scott's  nomination  because  of  the  prospect  of  his 
easy  defeat.*  At  the  Baltimore  Democratic  convention  at 
the  beginning  of  June  the  Tugalo  and  Southern  Rights 
delegations  were  both  admitted  as  a  joint  representation  from 
Georgia.  The  friends  of  Cass,  Buchanan  and  Douglas  each 
^blocking  the  hopes  of  the  others,  the  convention  nominated 
Franklin  Pierce,  another  "Northern  man  with  Southern 
principles,"  with  William  R.  King  of  Alabama  as  a  running 
mate;  and  it  adopted  a  strong  "finality"  plank  in  its  plat 
form.  The  Southern  Rights  delegates  then  invited  the 
Tugaloes  to  unite  with  them  in  a  joint  address  calling  a 
great  ratification  meeting  in  Georgia;  but  the  latter  held 
aloof  with  a  view  to  preserving  their  alliance  with  the  Union 
Whigs  and  in  the  hope  that  if  Scott  should  be  nominated 
without  a  platform  the  Whigs  of  Georgia  would  join  in  an 
unanimous  endorsement  of  Pierce.f  The  Southern  Rights 
Democrats  lost  no  time  in  nominating  an  electoral  ticket  from 
among  their  own  membership.  The  Whig  convention, 
meeting  at  Baltimore  at  the  middle  of  June,  nominated 
Scott  as  was  anticipated;  but  it  also  adopted  an  endorse- 

*  Letter  of  Toombs  to  Howell  Cobb,  May  27,  1852. 
t  Letter  of  James  Jackson,  Washington,  D.  C,  June  8,  1852,  to  Howell 
Cobb. 


110  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

ment  of  the  Compromise  in  its  platform.  Thereupon  a 
movement  among  the  Georgia  Whigs,  led  by  Senator  Dawson, 
brought  forth  an  electoral  ticket  on  Scott's  behalf,  while 
Toombs  and  Stephens  after  further  indecision  announced 
that  they  would  support  neither  of  the  nominations  but 
favored  a  separate  ticket  with  Daniel  Webster  at  its  head. 
The  Tugaloes  thus  faced  the  prospect  of  being  left  without 
either  Whig  or  Democratic  allies.  In  the  hope  of  avoiding 
this  they  summoned  a  convention  of  the  nearly  defunct 
Constitutional  Union  party  to  meet  at  Milledgeville,  July 
15.  When  it  assembled  the  Tugaloes  comprised  a  majority 
of  its  membership;  but  when  they  tried  to  force  through  a 
resolution  for  the  nomination  of  a  Pierce  ticket,  the  Whig 
delegates  bolted.  The  Tugalo  rump  then  sadly  nominated 
an  independent  ticket  of  Pierce  electors.*  In  August  the 
executive  committee  of  the  Constitutional  Union  party 
announced  that  party's  dissolution.  The  Scott  and  Webster 
Whigs  thereupon  held  negotiations  looking  to  a  fusion,  but 
without  success;  f  and  in  September  a  similar  negotiation 
between  the  two  branches  of  the  Democrats  met  with  a 
similar  failure.  Just  before  election  day  the  news  came  of 
Webster's  death;  nevertheless  the  ticket  which  had  been 
nominated  to  vote  for  him  as  President  and  Jenkins  of 
Georgia  as  Vice-President  received  5289  votes  in  Georgia. 
Of  the  remaining  votes,  the  "regular"  electors  for  Pierce 
received  33,843  and  were  elected;  the  Scott  ticket  15,789; 
the  Tugalo  ticket  5733;  and  a  ticket  of  Southern-rights 
extremists  pledged  to  vote  for  Troup  and  Quitman 
received  119. 

The  complications  in  this  campaign  led  Toombs  to  reflect 
deeply  during  a  period  of  illness  from  rheumatism  in  the 
spring  and  early  summer  and  to  deliver  in  the  House  on  July 
3,  1852,  a  speech  which,  like  those  for  which  Edmund  Burke 

*  Federal  Union,  July  20,  1852. 
f  Federal  Union,  August  24,  1852. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  in 

is  famous,  proclaimed  his  political  philosophy  as  well  as  his 
views  on  the  existing  situation.  After  fifteen  years  of  strife, 
he  said,  his  constituents  desired  security  and  repose,  and 
they  intended  to  get  them  if  it  were  possible  by  any  action  of 
theirs  in  the  pending  presidential  campaign.  "In  con 
formity  with  these  views  of  a  local  though  not  a  sectional 
organization,"  numerous  Senators  and  Congressmen  had 
declared  in  the  previous  session  of  Congress  that  they  would 
support  no  man  for  President  who  was  not  known  to  be  in 
favor  of  the  Compromise  of  1850.  "I  approved  of  that 
pledge,  and  I  intend  to  adhere  to  it  also  with  fidelity.  It  is 
the  key,  sir,  to  my  present  position  and  to  my  future  action 
with  reference  to  this  presidential  campaign/'  He  then 
discussed  the  history  and  character  of  national  party  con 
ventions.  He  showed  that  they  were  an  innovation  origi 
nating  in  the  Van  Buren  campaign  of  1836,  and  that  their 
machinery  had  been  adopted  with  some  reluctance  by  the 
people.  Praising  the  spontaneous  methods  of  nomination 
which  had  prevailed  from  Washington's  time  to  Jackson's, 
he  lamented  the  latter-day  mechanism  as  a  useless  and  harm 
ful  incubus.  That  early  system,  said  he,  had  promoted  the 
general  welfare,  but  it  was  ill  suited  to  the  purposes  of  such 
men  as  prefer  their  own  to  the  public  interest.  These  men 
had  devised  national  conventions,  invoking  the  power  of 
association  in  order  to  subjugate  individual  opinion.  The 
earlier  system  had  led  to  the  choice  of  the  Presidents  from 
Washington  to  Jackson,  the  latter  one  had  elected  Van 
Buren,  Harrison,  Polk,  and  Taylor.  "Look  upon  this 
picture  and  upon  that."  Toombs  continued: 

"  These  conventions,  although  not  elected  by  the  people, 
nor  recognized  by  them,  not  responsible  to  them,  yet  by 
reason  of  the  unresisted  exercise  of  the  right  to  nominate  the 
Executive  of  this  nation,  have  already  become  a  real  power  in 
the  state,  and  exercise  a  dangerous  control  over  the  legislative 
body.  I  have  seen,  during  this  session  of  Congress,  the 


112  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

members  of  a  great  and  triumphant  party,  holding  a  majority 
of  fifty  in  this  House,  coming  here  through  constitutional 
and  legal  election,  with  the  right  to  speak  for  their  con 
stituents  on  all  questions  affecting  their  political  welfare, 
succumb  to  these  organizations,  and  say,  'We  do  not  choose 
to  declare  the  principles  by  which  our  own  party  shall  be 
governed,  because  it  would  be  usurping  the  rights  of  the 
national  convention.'  They  have  ignored  their  own  powers 
and  abandoned  their  own  duty.  They  are  false  to  a  high  trust, 
and  sanction  a  usurpation  whenever  they  utter  such  senti 
ments.  .  .  The  reason  is  obvious;  they  are  sent  here  by  and 
through  these  conventions,  and  not  by  the  people;  they  do 
but  obey  their  masters.  This  system  has  never  produced  and 
can  never  produce  statesmen.  .  .  .  They  have  no  need  of 
such  men.  Their  work  requires  another  description  of  work 
men;  and  he  is  not  wise,  he  does  not  truly  appreciate  the 
best  interests  of  his  country,  who  does  not  put  his  foot  upon 
them  now  and  forever.  .  .  . 

"  Party  success  being  the  life-blood  of  these  organizations, 
they  must  and  will,  whenever  it  is  necessary,  sacrifice  both 
men  and  principles  to  its  attainment.  .  .  .  Success  demands 
that  all  factions  of  the  coalition  shall  be  pacified,  the  god  of 
party  harmony  will  accept  none  but  noble  victims  —  thus 
great  public  services  become  barriers  instead  of  passports 
to  public  honors.  ...  A  moment's  examination  into  the 
discordant  materials  which  compose  these  conventions  will 
demonstrate  their  unfitness  to  maintain  principles  of  any 
sort.  They  neither  develop  new  truths  nor  correct  old 
errors.  They  usually  announce  with  pompous  certainty, 
political  axioms  which  nobody  denies,  and  mystify  with 
cunningly-contrived  phrases  controverted  points  of  public 
policy.  .  .  .  They  are  therefore  coalitions  'without  prin 
ciples  and  without  policy,  held  together  by  the  cohesive 
properties  of  the  public  plunder.'  Thus  constituted  they  can 
pull  down  but  cannot  build  up  systems.  .  .  .  They  can  com 
bine  for  mischief,  but  not  for  good.  .  .  .  Each  coalition  in 
turn  has  answered  the  needs  of  its  creation.  The  spoils  have 
not  only  been  regularly  distributed,  but  have  been  greatly 
augmented  to  meet  the  increasing  demand.  The  coalition 
gets  an  almoner  of  public  wealth  to  political  mendicants; 
the  people  get  the  privilege  of  replenishing  the  waste." 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  113 

Toombs  then  turned  to  the  affairs  of  the  current  cam 
paign.  The  Democrats,  he  said,  after  part  of  them  had 
followed  Van  Buren  into  the  Free-soil  camp  and  another 
portion  had  essayed  disunion  at  the  Nashville  convention, 
were  now  again  united. 

"The  condition  of  success  was,  that  Birnam  wood  should 
be  brought  to  Dunsinane  —  this  moral  miracle  must  be  per 
formed.  It  was  done.  The  huge  magnet  of  patronage  was 
waved  over  the  disaffected  regions,  and  by  its  power  of 
attraction  Buffalo  and  Nashville  were  brought  into  council 
together  at  Baltimore.  Free-soilers  and  Hunkers,  Seces 
sionists  and  Union  men,  Compromise  and  anti-Compromise 
men  —  all  shades  of  opinion  gathered  together  under 
the  power  of  Democrats  to  select  a  candidate  for  the 
Presidency.  The  result  of  their  labors  is  better  than  could 
have  been  fairly  expected.  It  is  true  they  threw  over 
board  all  those  statesmen  to  whom  public  expectation  and 
the  public  mind  had  been  directed,  and  selected  a  candi 
date  of  their  own;  but  the  candidate  selected  is  a  fair 
exponent  of  the  compromise  element  of  the  convention 
.  .  .  [and]  the  convention  did,  fully  and  fairly,  indorse 
and  pledge  themselves  to  abide  by  and  adhere  to  the  adjust 
ment  measures.  .  .  .  Therefore  the  requisition  of  the  Union 
party  of  Georgia  is  fully  complied  with,  and  these  candidates 
are  open  to  the  support  of  members  of  that  party,  without 
any  surrender  of  its  principles. 

"It  is  deeply  to  be  regretted  that  the  same  result  did  not 
happen  in  the  Whig  convention.  There  were  but  two  grand 
divisions  in  that  body  —  the  friends  and  enemies  of  the 
Compromise  measures.  The  former  were  divided  between 
Mr.  Fillmore  and  Mr.  Webster,  and  the  latter  concentrated  on 
General  Scott.  The  result  of  their  labors  was  that  the 
Compromise  was  adopted  and  General  Scott  was  nominated. 
The  Free-soil  Whigs  of  the  North  have  complete  control  of 
the  Whig  organization  in  all  of  the  non-slaveholding  states, 
and  Scott's  success  will  be  their  triumph,  and  a  triumph 
fatal  to  the  principles  of  the  Union  Whigs,  both  North  and 
South.  The  Whigs  who  supported  General  Scott  were  the 
men  who  had  been  most  active  by  speech  and  pen  from  the 
beginning  of  this  excitement  in  promoting  sectional  strife 


114  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  discord.  .  .  .  While  the  Compromise  resolution  of  the 
Whig  party  is  all  I  desired,  and  the  other  principles  are  in  the 
main  sound  and  republican,  I  have  seen  nothing  in  the  past 
history  of  the  men  who  offer  them  to  me,  to  afford  me  any 
reasonable  security  that  these  principles  would  be  honestly 
maintained.  .  .  .  But  what  does  General  Scott  say?  ...  'I 
accept  the  nomination  with  the  resolutions  annexed/  I 
take  it  cum  onere.  [Laughter.]  There  is  not  a  single  line 
in  the  whole  letter  which  expresses  his  approval  of  the  Com 
promise,  or  commits  him  to  its  faithful  maintenance.  .  .  . 

"The  reluctant  members  of  the  convention  are  told,  'You 
went  to  Baltimore  and  you  are  bound  by  the  action  of  the 
convention.'  But  I  wish  to  show  them  that  this  is  not  a 
sound  principle  of  party  action,  and  that  you  have  the  right 
to  demand  of  your  candidates  to  stand  up  to  general  rules  of 
honor  and  good  faith.  Whenever  parties  declare  their  prin 
ciples,  they  have  a  right  to  have  a  candidate  to  carry  them 
out.  They  have  a  right  to  know  whether  the  candidate 
approves  of  those  principles  or  not.  If  he  says  he  will  not, 
then  nobody  is  bound  by  the  nomination.  .  .  .  General 
Scott  has  not  done  it.  He  has  not  declared  his  approbation 
of  these  principles  in  any  part  of  his  letter,  but  on  the  con 
trary  he  has  declared  that  principles  shall  make  no  difference, 
when  it  comes  to  the  important  business  of  becoming  the 
almoner  of  fifty  millions  of  dollars  of  the  public  money. 
.  .  .  Under  these  circumstances  he  can  never  receive  my  sup 
port.  Let  the  Compromise  men  everywhere — Union  Whigs 
in  the  North  and  the  South  —  rally  once  more  in  support 
of  their  principles.  Let  them  make  an  open  and  manly 
resistance  to  the  election  of  General  Scott;  use  all  honor 
able  ways  and  means  to  defeat  him;  if  we  succeed  we  shall 
have  'conquered  a  peace/  a  lasting  enduring  peace;  and 
whatever  may  be  the  result,  we  shall  have  done  our  duty  to 
ourselves,  our  principles  and  our  country."  * 

Aside  from  this  speech  on  the  vices  of  national  conventions 
and  the  vexations  of  the  Scott-Pierce  campaign,  Toombs 
confined  his  activities  in  the  House  during  these  last  two 
years  of  his  membership  strictly  to  non-sectional  and  non- 
partisan  business,  chiefly  concerning  himself  as  usual  with 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  32d.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  816-820. 


THE    GEORGIA    PLATFORM  115 

promoting  frugality  and  responsibility  in  public  finance. 
An  utterance  on  March  2,  1853,  just  at  the  close  of  his 
service  in  that  chamber  is  characteristic:  "I  now  move 
to  appoint  another  committee  of  conference.  ...  I  will 
say  to  gentlemen  that  all  this  terror  of  driving  the  incoming 
administration  to  calling  an  extra  session  of  Congress  is 
utterly  erroneous.  We  ought  to  have  sound  legislation,  and 
I  believe  when  necessary  to  accomplish  that  object,  an 
extra  session  is  legitimate  and  proper.  Sir,  I  will  give 
millions  for  proper  legislation  but  not  one  cent  for  jobs." 


CHAPTER  VI 
A  SENATOR  IN  THE  FIFTIES 

WHEN  at  the  beginning  of  1854  Douglas  introduced 
his  fateful  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  no  member  of 
the  Senate,  with  two  or  three  insignificant  exceptions,  had 
seen  as  much  as  ten  years  of  senatorial  service.  Calhoun, 
Webster,  Benton,  and  Berrien,  sobered  by  decades  of  experi 
ence,  had  guided  the  Senate  in  the  crisis  of  1850,  but  had 
now  been  removed  by  death  or  defeat.  The  direction  of 
the  Senate  and  of  the  whole  Congress  was  passing  into  the 
hands  of  the  men  with  whom  Toombs  had  begun  service  in 
the  Lower  House  in  1845,  together  with  recruits  equipped 
similarly  with  great  vigor,  resolution  and  shrewdness,  and 
little  poise  or  breadth  of  view.  Seward,  Chase  and  Wade 
among  the  anti-slavery  leaders,  Douglas  and  Cass  who  were 
the  most  prominent  "Northern  men  with  Southern  prin 
ciples,"  together  with  Benjamin  and  Slidell  of  the  South, 
were  spoilsmen  full  of  expedients;  and  Sumner  on  one  side 
and  Mason  on  the  other  were  stubborn  impracticables. 
Hunter  who  was  exceptional  in  his  broad-mindedness  was 
exceptional  also  in  the  timidity  which  diminished  his  influ 
ence;  and  Bell,  the  lonely  pacifist,  was  usually  too  querulous 
to  be  forceful.  These,  together  with  Toombs,  and  with 
Jefferson  Davis  added  in  1857,  were  the  principal  figures  in 
the  Senate  during  the  remainder  of  the  ante-bellum  period. 
It  was  not  a  personnel  calculated  to  solve  problems  magis 
terially  nor  to  secure  peace  and  prosperity  to  the  country. 

Toombs  entered  the  Senate  with  powers  matured,  reputa 
tion  established,  purposes  fixed  and  ambition  satisfied.     He 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  117 

was,  and  was  known  to  be,  an  uncompromising  foe  of  patron 
age  methods  and  all  other  means  for  using  government 
resources  for  party  advantage,  a  severe  critic  of  party  con 
ventions,  caucus  irresponsibility  and  committee  secresy, 
a  perpetually  alert  guardian  of  the  public  treasury,  a  caustic 
censor  of  those  who  participated  in  public  squanderings,  an 
enthusiastic  devotee  of  justice,  and  an  ardent  champion 
of  Southern  rights  in  all  crises  threatening  their  infringement. 
Furthermore,  he  was  known  by  his  own  assertion  to  hold 
state  allegiance  superior  to  federal  allegiance  in  its  obliga 
tion  upon  himself,  and  to  be  an  advocate  of  secession  in  last 
resort.  His  steady  policy  in  House  and  Senate  was  such  as 
to  make  him  unavailable  for  presidential  or  cabinet  office 
in  a  regime  of  machine  politics;  and  he  was  on  record  as 
desiring  no  administrative  appointment  at  any  time.  With 
his  industry,  his  talents  and  his  patriotism,  Toombs  was 
prepared  to  be  a  steady-going  wheel-horse  in  the  senatorial 
routine  in  quiet  times,  but  ready  to  serve  as  a  fiery  charger 
in  time  of  battle.  His  preference  was  for  the  former  capacity 
and  he  reverted  to  it  between  each  of  the  crises,  and  indeed 
never  completely  departed  from  it  even  in  the  height  of 
sectional  conflicts. 

Belated  in  reaching  Washington  for  his  first  session  in 
the  Senate,  Toombs  took  his  seat  on  January  23,  1854.  On 
January  4  Douglas  had  presented  his  epoch-making  report 
and  bill  for  the  organization  of  the  territory  of  Nebraska,  pro 
posing  that  the  question  of  slavery  should  be  left  for  the 
settlers  to  determine.  Twelve  days  later  Dixon  of  Kentucky 
had  moved  to  amend  the  bill  by  adding  a  provision  expressly 
repealing  the  Missouri  Compromise  act  of  1820  so  far  as  it 
prohibited  slavery  in  any  of  the  territories  of  the  United 
States.  If  an  assertion  by  Seward  reported  by  Montgomery 
Blair  in  after  years  be  true,  Dixon  in  offering  his  amendment 
was  prompted  by  Seward,  whose  ulterior  purpose  could  only 
have  been  the  creation  of  an  all-embracing  anti-slavery 


Il8  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

party  at  the  North.*  On  January  23  Douglas  brought  in 
from  his  committee  on  the  territories  a  new  bill  as  a  sub 
stitute,  dividing  the  Nebraska  region  into  two  territories, 
Kansas  and  Nebraska,  and  declaring  that  the  eighth  section 
of  the  Missouri  Compromise  act  which  had  prohibited  slavery 
in  the  territory  of  the  Louisiana  purchase  above  '36°  30', 
being  contrary  to  and  having  been  superseded  by  the  prin 
ciples  of  the  legislation  of  1850,  was  now  void. 

It  was  on  this  day  that  Toombs  arrived.  On  the  same 
day  Chase,  Sumner  and  others  sent  to  press  in  the  anti- 
slavery  newspapers  an  elaborate  address  to  the  people  of 
the  United  States  denouncing  the  proposed  legislation  "as 
a  gross  violation  of  a  sacred  pledge;  as  a  criminal  betrayal 
of  precious  rights;  as  part  and  parcel  of  an  atrocious  plot 
to  exclude  from  a  vast  unoccupied  region  immigrants  from 
the  Old  World  and  free  laborers  from  our  own  states,  and 
convert  it  into  a  dreary  region  of  despotism,  inhabited  by 
masters  and  slaves."  f  Nevertheless  on  the  following  day, 
before  the  news  of  the  address  reached  the  Senate,  Chase 
and  Sumner  requested  and  obtained  the  postponement  of 
discussion  for  a  week  on  the  ground  that  Senators  needed 
time  to  study  the  question.  On  January  30  Douglas 
reopened  the  debate  by  denouncing  the  arguments  of  this 
address  and  the  bad  faith  of  its  authors.  Chase  replied 
with  vigor,  declaring  that  in  his  opinion  the  Missouri  Com 
promise  pledge  was  sacred  and  absolutely  binding.  Wade 
followed  on  February  6  in  similar  strain,  and  together  with 
Chase  charged  falsely  that  the  bill  was  the  product  of  a  con 
spiracy  between  the  Douglas  group  and  the  Southerners. 
The  debate  then  became  general. 

Toombs  had  already  put  on  record  in  Georgia  his  opinion 
that  the  restrictions  in  the  Missouri  act  had  been  an  unwise 

*  J.  W.  Burgess,  The  Middle  Period,  pp.  387,  388. 
f  The  text  is  printed  in  the  Congressional  Globe,  33d.  Cong.,  1st.  sess., 
pp.  281,  282. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  119 

concession  on  the  part  of  the  South.  In  the  address  to  the 
people  of  Georgia  which  he  had  published  in  October,  1850, 
in  support  of  the  Compromise  of  that  year,  he  had  con 
gratulated  the  people  upon  "having  recovered  the  principle 
unwisely  surrendered  in  1820";  and  continuing  on  the 
subject  of  that  enactment  had  written:  "The  struggle  was 
violent  and  protracted;  the  republic  was  shaken  to  its  founda 
tions;  and  wise  and  good  and  patriotic  men  believed  its 
hour  of  dissolution  had  come.  In  an  evil  hour  the  South 
bought  this  clear,  plain  and  palpable  right  for  Missouri 
only  at  a  great  price,  a  price  that  ought  not  to  have  been 
paid,  a  price  worth  more  to  her  than  the  Union.  Instead 
of  striking  from  the  limbs  of  her  young  sister  with  the  sword 
the  fetters  which  the  North  sought  unjustly  to  impose  upon 
them,  the  South  ransomed  her  by  allowing  slavery  to  be 
prohibited  in  all  that  part  of  Louisiana  territory  lying  north 
of  the  parallel  36°  30'  north  latitude  and  west  of  Missouri. 
This  great  principle,  thus  compromised  away  in  1820,  has 
been  rescued,  re-established  and  firmly  planted  in  our  politi 
cal  system  by  the  recent  action  of  Congress."  In  writing 
this,  however,  Toombs  had  no  further  purpose  than  to 
bespeak  Southern  approval  for  the  legislation  of  1850. 
Instead  of  urging  the  repeal  of  the  restriction  of  1820,  he 
asked  that  South  and  North  should  let  sleeping  dogs  lie. 
When  studying  problems  in  1853  and  contemplating  a 
prospective  career  for  himself  in  the  Senate,  he  reckoned  as 
usual  upon  devoting  himself  to  non-sectional  business  to 
the  utmost  that  circumstances  would  permit.  He  thought 
the  adjustment  of  1850  was  adequate,  and  though  disquieted 
by  Northern  interferences  with  fugitive-slave  rendition,  he 
was  little  disposed  to  reopen  the  strife  over  the  general 
slavery  issue.  Rumor  had  it  in  1854  and  afterward  that 
Toombs  had  led  Douglas  into  proposing  the  Kansas  bill.* 
But  in  fact  he  knew  nothing  of  Douglas's  plan  until  after 
*  Rhodes,  History  of  the  United  States,  I,  431,  432. 


120  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

the  bill  had  been  introduced;  and  even  after  reaching  Wash 
ington  he  withheld  his  support  until  it  became  unques 
tionable  that  all  the  Democratic  leaders  but  himself,  and  the 
whole  Southern  Democratic  rank  and  file,  were  thoroughly 
committed  to  the  strife  whether  he  gave  aid  or  not.  Colonel 
John  C.  Reed,  who  for  many  years  during  Toombs's  life 
took  notes  of  his  conversations  with  a  Boswellian  purpose, 
wrote  of  Toombs  in  this  connection:  "He  always  declared 
in  private  conversation  after  the  war  that  the  Democratic 
party  was  ripened  and  committed  by  Douglas  and  his  co- 
workers  to  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  while  he 
was  kept  away  from  Washington  by  necessary  attention  to 
the  interests  of  a  widowed  sister,  otherwise  with  his  com 
manding  position  at  the  time,  he  would  have  crushed  the 
scheme  at  its  first  proposal.  When  he  returned  to  his  public 
duties,  to  his  amazement  he  found  every  prominent  member 
of  the  party  was  irrevocably  for  the  repeal,  and  he  could 
do  nothing  but  embrace  the  inevitable."  * 

Though  Toombs  attended  a  caucus  of  the  friends  of  the 
bill  on  February  3  and  endorsed  it  in  a  letter  to  his  friend 
W.  W.  Burwell  of  Baltimore  the  same  day,f  he  did  not  enter 
the  debate  until  a  month  after  taking  his  seat.  Then  on 
February  23  he  quoted  the  extract  above  given  from  his 
own  address  of  1850,  and  proceeded  in  an  elaborate  speech 
to  declare  his  adhesion  to  Douglas's  proposals.  His  partisan 
ship  could  not  be  half-hearted.  He  declared  the  bill  to  em 
body  a  just  solution  of  the  territorial  problem,  far  preferable 
to  the  previous  temporary  expedients.  Defending  its  good 
faith,  he  showed  that  that  had  not  been  questioned  except 
by  those  who  openly  trampled  the  laws  of  1850  under  foot 
and  denied  the  binding  effect  of  the  supreme  compact,  the 
Federal  Constitution  —  men  who,  instead  of  being  nationalists 
as  they  claimed,  flourished  only  upon  sectional  discord  and 

*  The  Brothers'  War,  p.  262. 

f  Original  preserved  in  the  Library  of  Congress. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  121 

valued  their  own  dogmas  more  highly  than  the  preservation 
of  the  Union.  He  showed  that  the  enactment  of  1820,  far 
from  being  a  Northern  concession  or  a  sacred  sectional  com 
pact,  had  been  hit  upon  as  a  mere  emergency  expedient  and 
had  received  the  votes  of  but  a  minority  of  the  Northern 
Senators  and  Representatives.  He  praised  the  Douglas 
plan  of  leaving  institutions  to  be  determined  by  the  citizens 
as  an  essential  requirement  of  American  life  and  of  the  Con 
stitution,  declaring  that  the  bill  was  primarily  a  return  to 
sound  fundamental  principles  and  but  secondarily  a  magnani 
mous  concession  to  the  South.* 

In  the  course  of  this  speech  Toombs  proclaimed  that 
"so  far  from  its  being  true  that  the  Constitution  localized 
slavery,  it  nationalized  it."  His  jurisprudence  here  was 
endorsed  in  futile  fashion  three  years  later  by  the  Supreme 
Court  in  the  Dred  Scott  case.  He  declared  incidentally 
that  "Justice  is  the  highest  expediency,  the  supreme  wisdom." 
This  maxim  is  approved  by  many  philosophers;  but  his 
application  of  it  in  support  of  the  Douglas  bill  was  pecul 
iarly  inappropriate,  as  was  demonstrated  within  the  few  years 
following. 

Bell  on  March  3  delivered  against  the  bill  the  greatest 
speech  of  his  life,  questioning  its  constitutionality,  declaring 
that  its  enactment  would  vastly  increase  the  anti-slavery 
sentiment  at  the  North,  and  denying  that  slavery  could 
practicably  be  extended  into  the  territories  concerned.  But 
nearly  all  the  Southerners  as  well  as  the  Douglas  group  were 
resolute  in  their  policy,  and  the  bill  passed  the  Senate  on 
March  4  by  34  votes  to  14.  Before  a  vote  was  reached  in  the 
House  it  became  evident  that  a  furor  of  opposition  to  it 
was  developing  in  the  North;  but  by  adroit  parliamentary 
tactics  on  the  part  of  Stephens  it  was  forced  through  the 
House  by  a  vote  of  113  to  100  on  May  22,  and  the  President 
signed  the  act,  May  30. 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  330!.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  347  ff. 


122  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

The  fallacy  of  the  measure  was  that  it  referred  to  the 
settlers  who  might  enter  a  then  vacant  territory  the  deter 
mination  of  an  issue  in  which  they  would  normally  have 
little  interest  but  which  was  of  extreme  concern  to  the 
country  at  large.  It  accordingly  invited  pro-  and  anti-slavery 
men  everywhere  to  give  artificial  stimulation  to  men  of  their 
views  to  hurry  into  the  Kansas  territory  to  do  battle  by 
voting  and  otherwise  for  the  respective  causes  in  which  they 
were  enlisted.  The  act  promptly  aroused  a  bitter  discussion 
in  the  sectional  presses,  and  it  shortly  gave  occasion  for 
sectional  rivalry  in  colonizing  voters  in  Kansas,  followed  by 
a  bitter  wrangle  in  Congress  and  the  newspapers  as  to  the 
legitimacy  of  the  methods  used  by  either  side. 

Had  the  colonization  of  Kansas  been  a  normal,  spontaneous 
movement  of  people  in  search  of  better  economic  opportuni 
ties  the  North  would  have  had  the  advantage.  Its  popula 
tion  was  constantly  swelled  by  European  immigration, 
whereas  the  South,  offering  comparatively  small  attraction 
to  incoming  wage-workers  or  small  farmers,  had  well-nigh 
exhausted  its  colonizing  strength  by  furnishing  settlers  for 
Missouri,  Arkansas  and  Texas.  Moreover,  the  Kansas 
climate  was  not  conducive  to  colonization  by  men  with 
plantation  gangs,  since  it  was  unsuited  to  the  cultivation  of 
the  Southern  staple  crops.  When  the  issue  took  the  form  of 
promoting  and  financing  an  abnormal  rush  of  voters  and 
fighters  into  the  territory,  the  South  was  again  and  more 
decisively  at  a  disadvantage.  The  abolitionists  and  Free- 
soilers  had  societies  ready-organized  with  large  funds  at 
command,  and  in  their  communities  a  large  supply  of  float 
ing  capital  was  available  for  any  emergency  of  the  popular 
cause,  whereas  the  Southern  people  were  very  slightly  organ 
ized  and,  as  usual,  short  of  cash.  The  one  advantage  pos 
sessed  by  the  pro-slavery  side  was  dangerous  to  the  cause:  the 
proximity  of  Missouri  and  the  willingness  of  the  pro-slavery 
Missourians  to  invade  Kansas  on  election  days  and  vie  with 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  123 

the  irresponsible  element  of  the  anti-slavery  party  in  stuffing 
the  ballot  boxes.  When  the  Free-soilers  denounced  this 
practice,  the  reply  followed  that  the  Emigrant  Aid  Com 
pany  of  New  England  had  prompted  it  by  its  illegitimate 
colonization  of  voters. 

A  field  inquiry  by  the  present  writer  among  the  people  on 
both  sides  of  the  Missouri-Kansas  border  has  convinced  him 
that  there  was  a  much  more  even  distribution  of  virtue 
and  villainy  between  the  respective  factions  than  the  his 
torians  have  generally  described.  The  crusading  spirit, 
whether  pro-  or  anti-slavery,  was  shared  by  the  just  and  the 
unjust;  and  agencies  for  colonizing  voters,  North  and  South, 
enlisted  emigrants  in  the  stress  of  the  times  with  little 
regard  for  their  personal  qualities.  There  were  pure-minded 
zealots  and  there  were  outright  desperadoes  mingled  with 
the  more  normal  partisans  of  each  side.  Among  the  "border 
ruffians"  of  Missouri,  for  example,  who  invaded  Kansas  on 
election  days,  there  were  many  men  impelled  by  an  emo 
tional  exaltation  not  unlike  that  which  prompted  self-styled 
friends  of  the  negro  to  despise  and  defeat  the  fugitive-slave 
rendition  law  in  Ohio  and  Massachusetts.  Others  in  the 
Missouri  bands  of  course  went  in  dogged  anger;  while 
youths  joined  the  junkets  in  the  same  holiday  spirit  of  adven 
ture  which  led  thousands  a  few  years  later  to  join  the  great 
armies  in  Virginia.  The  conditions  in  Kansas  led  quickly 
to  guerilla  warfare,  in  which  both  factions  were  about  equally 
active  and  equally  responsible.  The  anti-slavery  editors, 
preachers  and  politicians  promptly  worked  up  the  Kansas 
news  for  increasing  the  Northern  agitation.  Most  of  the 
pro-slavery  spokesmen  on  the  other  hand  regarded  the  strife 
in  the  territory  as  the  natural  result  of  Emigrant  Aid  Com 
pany's  activities,  and  viewed  the  distortion  of  the  news  as 
merely  a  fresh  instance  of  Yankee  hypocrisy;  and  they 
declined  to  enter  a  rivalry  in  screaming. 

In  Congress  the  issue  which  the  friends  of  the  Douglas 


124  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

bill  supposed  they  had  settled  by  its  enactment  in  1854 
became  rife  again  within  a  year  and  a  half.  In  reply  mainly 
to  a  speech  by  Mr.  Hale  of  New  Hampshire  who  had  now 
reentered  the  Senate,  Toombs  expressed  in  a  speech  of 
February  28,  1856,  his  policy  in  view  of  the  news  of  disturb 
ances  in  Kansas: 

"  I  intend,  to  the  utmost  verge  of  the  law,  to  sustain  the 
supremacy  of  law  in  that  territory.  I  will  maintain  its 
peace  at  every  cost.  If  traitors  seek  to  disturb  the  peace 
of  the  country,  I  desire  that  it  shall  be  no  sectional  contest 
—  I  do  not  see  the  end  of  that.  I  prefer  that  the  conflict 
shall  be  between  the  Federal  Government  and  the  lawless. 
I  can  see  the  end  of  that.  The  law  will  triumph  and  the 
evil  stop.  .  .  .  The  Senator  from  New  Hampshire  .  .  . 
may  want  a  sectional  contest;  he  cannot  get  it.  ...  We 
who  passed  this  Kansas  bill  .  .  .  intend  to  maintain  its  prin 
ciples.  .  .  .  We  intend  that  the  actual,  bona  fide  settlers  of 
Kansas  shall  be  protected  in  the  full  exercise  of  all  the  rights 
of  freemen;  that  unawed  and  uncontrolled,  they  shall  freely 
and  of  their  own  will  legislate  for  themselves  to  every  extent 
allowed  by  the  Constitution  while  they  have  a  territorial 
government;  and  when  they  shall  be  in  condition  to  come 
into  the  Union,  and  may  desire  it,  that  they  shall  come  into  the 
Union  with  whatever  republican  constitution  they  may  pre 
fer  and  adopt  for  themselves;  that  in  the  exercise  of  these 
rights  they  shall  be  protected  against  insurrection  from 
within  and  invasion  from  without.  The  rights  are  accorded 
to  them  without  reference  to  the  result,  and  will  be  main 
tained,  in  my  opinion,  by  the  North  and  the  South.  I 
stood  upon  this  ground  at  the  passage  of  the  bill;  I  shall 
maintain  it  with  fidelity  and  honor  to  the  last  extremity. 
The  Senator  from  New  Hampshire,  seeming  unable  to  com 
prehend  the  principles  of  the  Kansas  bill,  attempts  to  show 
that  in  the  opinion  of  many  of  its  supporters  the  territory 
would  be  a  free  state  under  its  action.  That  opinion  was 
certainly  held  by  many  of  them,  and  is  now  held  by  many 
of  them.  Though  I  expressed  no  opinion  on  the  subject,  I 
thought  then  and  think  now  that  such  would  most  probably 
be  its  future  destiny,  though  the  friends  of  that  measure, 
both  from  the  North  and  the  South,  placed  their  support  of 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  125 

it  upon  no  such  basis.     They  supported  the  bill  without 
reference  to  the  result."  * 

To  carry  out  the  purpose  thus  described,  Toombs  matured 
a  plan  which  he  presented  to  the  Senate  on  June  24  in  the 
form  of  a  bill.  This  provided  that  under  the  superintendence 
of  a  presidentially-appointed  commission  to  prevent  fraud 
and  intimidation  a  census  should  be  taken  in  Kansas;  that 
all  white  males  twenty-one  years  old  who  were  bona  fide 
residents,  found  by  the  census  takers,  should  be  registered  as 
voters;  that  these  voters  should  in  the  coming  November  elect 
delegates  to  a  constitutional  convention,  and  that  Congress 
should  admit  Kansas  as  a  state  promptly  with  whatever 
constitution,  republican  in  form,  that  convention  might 
adopt.  In  a  speech  on  June  23,  giving  notice  of  his  inten 
tion  to  introduce  the  bill,  Toombs  showed  its  superiority, 
from  the  points  of  view  of  all  men  but  factionists,  over  the 
numerous  competing  proposals  on  Kansas  already  before 
the  Senate.  He  invited  assistance  from  all  quarters  in  per 
fecting  the  bill  so  as  to  protect  the  integrity  of  the  ballot 
to  the  fullest  extent,  to  prevent  intimidation  as  well  as  fraud, 
and  in  short  to  guarantee,  regardless  of  sectional  effect, 
that  the  resulting  constitution  should  be  the  true  expression 
of  the  will  of  the  community.  The  only  essential  objection 
to  which  the  bill  was  open,  he  said,  was  that  Kansas  had  not 
yet  a  population  large  enough  to  entitle  her  to  statehood  in 
the  ordinary  routine;  but  this  was  only  a  question  of  expedi 
ency,  and  he  considered  that  the  need  of  quieting  the  discord 
throughout  the  country  outweighed  that  objection.  He  con 
cluded  by  saying:  "Having  advocated  it  in  good  faith,  as 
sound  and  good  and  just,  without  reference  to  its  result,  I 
offer  to  the  Senate  a  measure  which  will  test  the  question 
fairly  and  put  it  to  rest,  leaving  to  professional  agitators, 
and  those  whose  business  is  to  mislead  and  delude  the  people 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  34th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  115-118. 


126  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

and  madden  their  passions  with  false  stories  of  wrongs 
and  outrages,  not  one  solitary  inch  of  ground  on  which  to 
stand."* 

Toombs's  purpose  was  obviously  sincere. f  The  committee 
on  territories  accepted  the  bill,  and  on  July  2  the  Senate 
brought  the  question  to  a  vote.  The  motive  of  Toombs  in 
offering  the  bill  had  been  to  present  not  a  compromise  but 
a  principle  of  settlement.  In  the  debate  on  July  2  preced 
ing  the  vote,  Seward  spoke  of  the  bill  as  a  compromise; 
Toombs  interrupted  him  saying,  "It  is  no  compromise/' 
Seward  rejoined,  "The  day  for  compromises  is  ended"; 
Toombs  agreed,  "I  am  glad  of  it,  sir";  and  Seward  endorsed 
him:  "The  honorable  Senator  is  glad  of  it,  and  so  am  I." 
Crittenden,  however,  who  had  now  returned  to  the  Senate, 
protested,  "I  will  compromise  'to  the  last  syllable  of  recorded 
time'  to  preserve  this  Union,  so  long  as  I  can  preserve  it  in 
its  integrity  and  on  those  sound  principles  on  which  it 
originally  rested."  f  A  little  later  Toombs  in  reply  to 
Seward  and  Sumner  said:  "When  I  make  the  annunciation 
that  I  am  willing  to  surrender  Kansas  precisely  in  conformity 
with  the  will  of  the  nation,  .  .  .  how  am  I  met?  Instead  of 
a  pure  ballot  box,  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  and  the 
Senator  from  New  York  tender  me  the  cartridge  box.  Mr. 
President,  if  I  believed  these  gentlemen  represented  the 
North,  I  would  accept  it  and  withdraw  my  bill  now.  If  I 
believed  that  the  free  states  were  ready  for  that  issue,  before 
God  and  my  country  I  would  not  shrink  from  it.  I  am 
content  to  accept  it  whenever  the  North  offers  it.  ...  But 
I  do  not  know  what  claim  either  of  these  gentlemen  has  to 
speak  for  the  North."  § 

In    a  supplementary  debate   in    the    Senate  on  July  9  fl 

*  Congressional  Globe,  34th  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  p.  1439. 

t  Cf.  Rhodes,  History  of  the  United  States,  II,  189-195. 

t  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  34th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  762,  763. 

§  Ibid.,  p.  770.  If  Ibid.,  34th  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  869. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  127 

Fessenden  charged  the  pro-slavery  element  with  responsi 
bility  for  the  disturbances  in  Kansas  and  adduced  as  evi 
dence  the  report  recently  made  by  Howard  and  Sherman 
who  formed  the  Republican  majority  appointed  in  the 
House  for  investigating  affairs  in  Kansas.  This  document 
was  silent  concerning  the  massacre  by  John  Brown  and  his 
followers  on  Pottawatomie  creek;  but  the  third  member 
of  the  committee,  Oliver,  who  formed  its  Democratic  minor 
ity,  had  prepared  an  independent  report  including  data  upon 
the  Pottawatomie  murders.  Although  Oliver's  report  was 
not  presented  to  the  House  until  two  days  after  this  debate 
in  the  Senate,  information  of  it  was  current  in  the  capital, 
and  news  of  Brown's  crime  had  of  course  already  been  pub 
lished  in  such  newspapers  as  had  no  interest  in  the  suppres 
sion  of  it.  Replying  to  Fessenden,  Toombs  spoke  slightingly 
of  the  Howard-Sherman  report,  declaring  it  to  be  partisan 
and  thoroughly  unreliable,  since  the  politicians  sent  out  to 
investigate  would  surely  find  what  they  set  out  to  find  and 
nothing  more;  and  he  intimated  that  a  minority  report  would 
shortly  be  forthcoming.  Fessenden  interjected:  "They 
stand  two  to  one."  Toombs  retorted:  "That  is  exactly 
where  I  knew  they  would  stand."  Toombs  went  on  to 
reiterate  his  expressions  of  regret  at  the  disorders  in  the 
territory  and  to  attribute  part  of  the  responsibility  to  the 
anti-slavery  partisans.  "These  free-state  marauders,"  he 
said,  "free-soil  freebooters,  it  is  well  authenticated,  have 
recently  gone  to  the  homes  of  peaceable  citizens  and  mur 
dered  them  in  the  dead  of  night.  .  .  .  Other  murders  and 
arsons  of  equal  atrocity  have  been  committed  in  that  terri 
tory.  By  whom?  By  those  oppressed  and  peaceable  free- 
state  citizens  of  Kansas."  Fessenden  here  made  another 
of  his  frequent  interruptions:  "Have  you  any  proof  of  it?" 
Toombs  replied,  "I  have  seen  affidavits  as  to  the  facts," 
but  he  did  not  further  press  the  point.  He  said  a  few  minutes 
afterward  in  reference  to  Fessenden's  interruptions  and 


128  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

innuendoes:  "The  gentleman  may  afford  to  deal  fairly  with 
me,  for  I  have  no  concealments."  But  Fessenden  had  some 
thing  to  gain  by  avoiding  frankness.  The  assertions  which 
Toombs  had  made  were  entirely  true,  as  the  world  now 
knows;  but  the  evidence  then  within  his  reach  was  of 
partisan  character  and  uncertain  reliability.  Evidence  of 
similar  quality  was  often  used  before  and  after  that  episode 
by  Fessenden  and  his  associates  without  hesitation;  but 
Toombs's  scruple  for  soundness  of  evidence  doubtless  enabled 
Fessenden  by  his  pettifogging  tactics  to  ward  off  an  impend 
ing  philippic.  It  is  curious  that  no  other  Southerner  in 
Congress,  except  Oliver  in  presenting  his  report,  made  use 
of  the  Pottawatomie  crime  in  discrediting  the  anti-slavery 
self-righteousness.*  The  end  of  the  session  was  near  at 
hand,  and  the  Southerners  were  weary  of  the  profitless 
wrangle.  In  their  effort  at  pacification  the  Democratic 
majority  had  already  carried  the  well-reasoned  Toombs  bill 
through  the  Senate  on  July  2  by  33  votes  against  the  Republi 
can  12.  In  the  House,  however,  where  the  Republicans  con 
trolled  the  machinery,  the  Toombs  bill  was  smothered. 
"Bleeding  Kansas"  served  the  anti-slavery  politicians  too 
well  for  them  to  join  in  any  plan  tending  toward  pacification. 
For  the  next  year  or  two  affairs  in  the  territory  continued 
in  turmoil.  In  1857  the  territorial  legislature  summoned 
a  convention  to  meet  at  Lecompton  in  September  and  frame 
a  state  constitution.  This  body  drew  up  a  constitution  on 
the  model  of  that  of  Missouri,  and  provided  that  it  should 
go  into  effect  upon  the  admission  of  the  state  by  Congress 
without  being  submitted  for  popular  ratification  except  in 
regard  to  a  single  clause  relating  to  slavery.  The  President 
transmitted  this  Lecompton  constitution  to  Congress  in 
February,  1858,  and  recommended  the  admission  of  the  state. 
Douglas  opposed  this  on  the  ground  that  the  principle  of 
popular  sovereignty  required  a  plebiscite  upon  the  constitu- 
*  Rhodes,  History  of  the  United  States,  II,  198. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  129 

tion.  Toombs  however  contended  that  delegates  elected 
for  the  purpose  were  entirely  competent  to  express  the 
sovereign  will  of  the  people.  He  declared  that  there  was 
no  unusual  occasion  for  a  popular  referendum  of  the  con 
vention's  work  in  Kansas,  and  showed  that  the  great  majority 
of  constitutions  adopted  in  the  American  commonwealths 
had  not  been  popularly  ratified.*  Toombs  supported  the 
Lecompton  bill  of  course,  and  aided  in  its  passage  by  the  Sen 
ate  on  March  23.  When  the  House  rejected  this  and  passed 
a  substitute  which  the  Senate  rejected,  and  a  conference 
committee  presented  in  the  English  bill  a  device  for  referring 
the  constitution  to  a  popular  vote  in  Kansas,  Toombs  sup 
ported  this  also.  He  still  wanted  to  end  the  wrangle  by 
admitting  the  state;  but  his  principal  feeling  was  of  disgust  at 
the  nauseous  entanglement  of  affairs,  and  his  chief  desire  was 
to  wash  his  hands  of  the  whole  business.  He  said,  April  29: 

"The  conduct  of  the  population  of  Kansas  has  been  such 
as  not  at  all  to  increase  my  estimate  of  their  capacity  for 
self-government.  It  would  be  sufficient  for  me,  even  after 
having  voted  for  it  in  1856,  to  say  now  that  the  events  of  the 
last  two  years  have  convinced  me  that  she  ought  not  to  be 
admitted  as  a  state.  I  apply  this  remark  to  all;  I  do  not 
apply  it  to  free-state  men  more  than  to  others.  There  have 
been  wars,  and  tumults,  and  frauds,  and  cheatings,  and  a 
disposition  manifested  everywhere  in  that  territory  totally 
to  disregard  the  law.  If  one  party  get  a  legislature,  they 
turn  everybody  else  out,  no  matter  which  party  it  is;  and 
a  majority  of  one  is  as  good  as  a  unanimous  vote.  There 
seems  to  be  an  incapacity  in  this  population,  thrown  in  there, 
I  admit,  under  the  most  unfortunate  circumstances,  to  govern 
themselves;  and  I  am  free  to  acknowledge  that  I  shall  not 
regret  if  one  consequence  of  this  measure  shall  be  to  put 
them  back  in  a  territorial  condition."  f 

Soon  after  the  enactment  of  the  English  bill,  Toombs  while 
assisting  at  a  Democratic  love-feast  at  the  White  House 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  35th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  524-526. 
f  Congressional  Globe,  35th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  1873. 


130  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

was  asked  for  a  public  expression  of  his  views  regarding  it, 
and  said: 

"This  is  a  pacification  in  which  there  has  been  no  dishonor 
anywhere,  in  which  there  has  been  no  concession  by  the 
North  to  the  South,  or  by  the  South  to  the  North;  but  in 
a  spirit  of  brotherhood  and  patriotism  they  have  come  to 
gether  and  settled  their  sectional  differences  upon  a  sacred 
and  permanent  and  fundamental  ground  of  public  principle 
and  public  honor.  [Applause.]  Therefore,  as  there  is  a 
triumph  nowhere,  there  is  a  sting  nowhere,  and  we  see  noth 
ing  in  the  bright  and  brilliant  future  but  peace  and  harmony 
and  prosperity  to  the  glorious  organization  of  the  Democratic 
party  who  have  brought  the  country  safe  through  all  its 
struggles.  Therefore,  gentlemen,  I  have  a  right  to  rejoice. 
Let  us  all  rejoice.  Let  the  voice  reverberate  from  the  hill 
tops  and  through  the  valleys  all  over  the  land,  from  the 
Atlantic  to  the  Pacific,  from  the  Lakes  to  the  Gulf,  that 
there  is  peace,  true  peace,  honorable  peace,  throughout  the 
land  of  America."  * 

It  seemed  for  the  time  in  fact,  with  the  rendering  of  the 
Dred  Scott  decision  in  1857  and  the  enactment  of  the  English 
bill  in  1858,  that  sectional  discord  had  been  ended  on  a  basis 
wholly  acceptable  to  the  South.  The  rejection  of  the  Lecomp- 
ton  constitution  in  the  Kansas  plebiscite  and  the  repudiation 
of  the  Dred  Scott  judgment  by  all  the  revived  forces  of  agi 
tation  at  the  North  soon  showed  the  baselessness  of  the  hope 
of  peace.  But  before  narrating  the  distressing  events  which 
determined  Toombs  and  most  of  his  Southern  colleagues 
finally  to  strike  for  Southern  independence,  let  us  consider  the 
more  peaceful  theme  of  Toombs's  non-sectional  activities  in 
the  Senate,  his  participation  in  party  developments  among 
the  people,  and  his  expressions  of  views  upon  negro  slavery. 

In  the  routine  affairs  of  the  Senate  Toombs's  indomitable 

devotion  to  frugality  and  justice  was  even  more  marked 

than  it  had  been  in  the  House,  and  oftentimes  made  him  a 

thorn  in  the  flesh  of  his  more  easy-going  fellow  Senators. 

*  Southern  Recorder,  Feb.  14,  1860. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  131 

They  occasionally  attempted  to  refute  his  arguments;  they 
more  often  combined  their  votes  to  override  his  resistance; 
and  the  great  bulk  of  the  people  were  too  much  absorbed  in 
the  slavery  struggle,  party  rivalries  and  private  money- 
making  to  heed  his  patriotic  alarms. 

Toombs  consistently  maintained  that  the  government 
should  collect  from  the  people  only  the  minimum  amount 
of  money  required  for  the  conduct  of  its  distinctly  necessary 
activities.  All  branches  added  to  the  public  service  for  the 
advantage  or  convenience  of  any  specific  group  of  the  people 
he  believed  should  have  their  expenses  defrayed  directly  by 
the  beneficiaries.  Against  the  clamor  of  the  great  majority 
of  his  colleagues  he  sturdily  contended  that  appropriations 
from  the  public  treasury  for  either  private  or  local  benefit, 
where  not  clearly  obligatory  for  the  sake  of  good  faith,  were 
unsound  and  demoralizing  as  well  as  in  most  cases  uncon 
stitutional.  He  held  that  the  army  should  be  kept  small, 
with  the  militia  available  for  emergencies;  *  he  maintained 
that  government  employees  should  be  paid  only  the  market 
rate  of  wages,  so  that  clerkships  should  cease  to  be  consid 
ered  as  plums.t  On  the  other  hand  he  thought  that  salaries 
for  judges  and  other  responsible  officials  should  be  made 
adequate  to  attract  capable  men,  but  that  they  ought  not 
to  depend  on  favoritism  or  caprice.  He  thought  that  the 
postal  service  should  be  self-supporting  whether  on  land  or 
sea,  and  he  particularly  opposed  the  subsidies  granted  to 
the  Collins  Line  of  transatlantic  steamers,  on  the  pretense  of 
quickening  the  transit  of  the  mails.  He  was  particularly 
severe  in  censuring  the  Collins  Line  because  it  was  monop 
olistic  and  because  it  notoriously  maintained  a  lobby  at 
Washington  to  promote  its  interests.!  Upon  similar  grounds 

*  Congressional  Globe,  35th  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  406-408. 
t  Ibid.,  p.  2107. 

J  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  33d.  Cong.,  2d.  sess.,  pp.  297-300;  Con 
gressional  Globe,  35th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  2832,  2834. 


132  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

of  lobbying  he  was  equally  severe  upon  certain  persons 
endeavoring  to  persuade  Congress  to  give  them  contracts 
for  the  erection  of  dry-docks.  Toombs  in  fact  declared 
repeatedly  that  Congress  was  utterly  incompetent  for  mak 
ing  a  wise  contract.  "How  can  Congress  make  a  contract?" 
he  asked  in  the  Collins  Line  debate,  and  answered  his  own 
rhetorical  question: 

"Here  are  sixty-four  of  us  in  this  body;  there  are  two 
hundred  and  thirty-six  in  the  other  House  —  gentlemen  of 
different  pursuits.  True,  there  may  be  one  or  two  ship- 
carpenters  among  the  whole  number,  but  the  great  bulk  of 
them  are  fit  for  nothing  on  earth  but  politics  —  fit  for  no 
business.  ...  As  for  the  idea  that  such  a  body  can  make 
a  contract,  I  presume  there  is  not  a  human  being  in  America, 
black  or  white,  who  can  doubt  that  it  is  the  most  unfit  body 
for  such  a  purpose  that  could  be  collected.  .  .  .  Nine-tenths 
act  from  ignorance  on  such  a  matter,  .  .  .  and  we  generally 
have  only  ex  parte  statements  from  those  interested.  We 
have  not  time  to  examine  the  public  questions  connected 
with  the  various  departments  of  the  government  and  all 
the  little  contracts  besides.  It  is  impossible  to  do  that  and 
attend  to  our  legislative  duties." 

Toombs  was  attentive  to  little  matters  in  the  routine  as 
well  as  to  great  ones,  with  a  special  penchant  for  obstructing 
private  pension  bills  and  exposing  river-and-harbor  grabs. 
He  opposed  all  pension  bills  whether  general  or  private,  on 
the  ground  that  they  gave  unjustified  gratuities;  and  he 
was  incorrigible  in  preventing  private  bills  from  slipping 
through  upon  lenient  committee  reports  unless  their  merits 
were  clearly  demonstrated  in  open  Senate.  His  attitude 
upon  all  bills  for  the  payment  of  private  claims  was  identical 
with  that  upon  pensions.  In  1858,  for  example,  on  a  bill 
to  indemnify  the  builder  of  a  lighthouse  on  Lake  Huron 
rhich  had  blown  down  in  1832,  he  said: 

"I  believe  that  nine-tenths  of  the  cases  which  the  Senate 
is  continually  pressed  to  consider,  to  the  omission  of  the 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  133 

general  public  business,  come  legitimately  and  expressly 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Claims,  and  often 
times  they  are  fraudulent  and  brought  here  because  a  com 
mittee  is  necessarily  an  easier  place  than  a  court.  Refer 
it  to  my  committee,  and  I  must  necessarily  take  ex  parte 
evidence.  I  am  not  in  a  condition  to  look  out  and  get 
evidence  on  the  other  side.  That  is  the  very  reason  we 
established  the  court  —  mainly  to  get  the  facts  on  both 
sides.  .  .  .  This  case  should  go  there  as  ...  a  case 
expressly  within  their  jurisdiction.  .  .  .  It  is  very  remark 
able  that  this  man  should  have  been  here  twenty-five  years 
ago  and  never  got  his  bill  through.  Very  probably  at  that 
time  other  people  knew  something  about  it.  ...  The 
officers  of  the  government  knew  something  about  it.  They 
have  passed  away  in  this  quarter  of  a  century.  Where  are 
they  today?  The  claimant  comes  here  today  with  this 
ex  parte  statement  and  asks  the  Senate  to  pass  it.  It  is 
bad  as  a  principle;  it  is  bad  as  a  precedent;  and  the  Senate 
ought  not  to  allow  it." 

The  motion  to  refer  it  to  the  Court  of  Claims,  however, 
was  defeated  by  27  votes  to  13  and  the  bill  was  passed. 

River-and-harbor  bills  were  the  greatest  of  these  abomi 
nations  in  Toombs's  sight,  because  he  considered  them 
unconstitutional  as  well  as  corrupt.  Again  and  again  he 
resisted  their  enactment,  now  with  fiery  denunciation  and 
now  with  restrained  vehemence.  "The  whole  system  is 
founded  on  robbery,  plunder  and  inequality,"  he  declared  in 
one  of  these  debates  on  July  31,  1854,  "and  is  supported  for 
no  other  reason  than  because  it  is  unequal  and  unjust.  If 
the  money  which  is  appropriated  to  these  improvements 
had  to  be  paid  out  by  each  locality,  they  would  prefer  a 
more  convenient  mode  of  doing  it;  but  it  is  because  they 
expect  to  plunder  other  sections  that  they  seek  to  pay 
themselves  out  of  the  common  fund.  ...  As  a  responsible 
Senator  I  am  called  upon  to  vote  upon  these  appropriations 
when  even  the  committee  having  charge  of  the  bill  do  not 
pretend  to  know  their  necessity."  The  log-rolling  which 


134  THE    LIFE   OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

was  a  feature  of  this  legislation  was  especially  a  stench  in 
his  nostrils:  "If  any  man  votes  for  one  appropriation  to 
get  another,  he  votes  corruptly,  and  is  unworthy  of  a  seat 
on  this  floor.  It  is  against  principles  of  legislation  and 
against  all  principles  of  honor.  ...  If  you  have  delib 
erately  voted  for  one  measure  which  does  not  meet  the 
approbation  of  your  judgment,  in  order  to  get  another,  you 
have  voted  corruptly,  you  have  not  discharged  your  duty." 
"Every  abuse,"  he  proclaimed  on  another  occasion,  "is  the 
natural  ally  of  every  other  abuse."  In  a  running  debate 
in  July  and  August,  1856,  he  expressed  his  opinion  of  the 
committees  which  reported  this  class  of  bills.  In  the  course 
of  the  discussion  Toombs  said:  "We  know  the  liberality 
with  which  this  committee  have  acted;  and  when  they  are 
acting  for  the  benefit  of  their  own  sections  and  states  it  is 
certainly  not  impossible  that  their  attachment  to  their 
beloved  constituents  may  have  made  them  unjust  to  the 
whole  country.  What  is  the  basis  on  which  these  estimates 
are  made?"  Mr.  Stuart  of  Michigan  retorted  with  the 
question,  "Who  is  responsible  for  the  organization  of  the 
committee,  let  me  ask?"  Toombs  replied:  "I  am  a  very 
plain  man,  and  if  I  were  to  go  into  this  matter  and  tell 
exactly  how  it  is  done,  gentlemen  would  say  I  was  personal, 
and  that  I  was  very  rude  and  rough.  I  know  how  com 
mittees  are  formed,  and  it  is  one  of  the  greatest  abuses  in 
the  Senate."  Stuart  replied:  "So  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
let  it  come  out  or  not,  as  the  Senator  chooses;  but  I  want  to 
ask  if  the  committees  of  the  Senate  are  not  elected  by  the 
Senate?"  Toombs  answered:  "Yes,  sir;  but  does  not  every 
Senator  know  how  they  are  elected?  Are  not  lists  brought 
here  from  party  caucuses?"  Stuart  replied  by  another 
question:  "Is  it  not  the  fact  that  they  are  elected  by  the 
Senate?"  which  Toombs  answered  by  saying,  "It  is  a  sham 
election."  The  colloquy  was  continued  at  considerable 
length  on  that  day  and  resumed  on  the  next,  July  30,  when 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  135 

Toombs  said:  "Enterprising  people,  who  look  for  appro 
priations,  who  get  on  committees  to  reach  the  public  treasury, 
get  appropriations  very  readily  for  their  own  localities." 
Mr.  Cass  thereupon  weakly  enquired,  "Does  the  Senator 
know  that  they  are  in  any  place  where  they  are  not  wanted  ?" 
Toombs  rejoined:  "I  suppose  everywhere  you  can  find 
somebody  who  says  they  are  wanted.  I  say  these  appro 
priations  are  unequal;  but  that,  it  seems,  does  not  make 
any  difference."  Toombs  supported  his  contentions  by 
appeals  to  the  Constitution  and  citations  of  the  fathers: 

"Why  do  we  want  constitutions?  Because  we  know  that 
majorities  are  unjust.  Why  do  we  bind  every  man  who 
takes  a  seat  here  by  the  strongest  obligations  that  can  bind 
a  man,  appealing  to  Omnipotence  for  the  truth  of  his  decla 
ration  that  he  will  stand  by  and  maintain  and  support  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States?  Because  the  framers 
of  the  Constitution  would  not  trust  you  without  it.  The 
Constitution  is  based  on  the  idea  that  where  the  interests 
of  particular  localities  are  at  stake  men  are  not  to  be  trusted; 
majorities  are  not  to  be  relied  upon;  they  are  unjust;  they 
will  take  advantages.  The  whole  history  of  human  nature 
is  daubed  and  blackened  and  defiled  by  the  injustice  and  the 
wrong  of  power.  Am  I  to  refrain  from  saying  this  because 
the  venerable  Senator  from  Michigan  tells  me  it  is  unfortu 
nate  that  this  impression  should  go  abroad  ?  .  .  .  Let  it  be 
proclaimed  that  it  may  be  remedied."  * 

Again,  discussing  the  devotion  of  the  Senators  belonging 
to  the  Republican  party  to  this  form  of  corruption,  he  said : 

"  Gentlemen  are  mistaken  if  they  suppose  that  any  other 
interest  can  make  me  pay  tribute.  ...  As  for  the  Black 
Republicans,  under  whatever  name  they  may  have  gone  — 
under  the  various  aliases  which  they  have  assumed,  from 
old  Federalists  till  now,  they  have  always  been  ready  to 
squander  public  money.  They  have  never  stopped  to 
inquire  into  its  constitutionality.  Their  object  was  to  get 
as  much  into  the  treasury  as  they  could,  by  unequal  and 
unjust  taxation,  and  then  vote  it  out  on  the  same  principles. 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  34th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  1052. 


136  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

They  acknowledged  no  restrictions  and  shrank  from  no 
waste  or  profligacy.  ...  A  large  party,  found  mostly  in 
one  portion  of  the  country,  have  endeavored  to  live  through 
and  by  means  of  the  government.  This  party,  under  all 
names  and  phases,  has  struggled  from  the  first  day  of  its 
existence  until  now  to  get  every  particle  of  the  industry 
of  their  section  protected  by  the  government.  Then  its 
representatives  come  here  and  reproach  the  South.  They 
say  to  her:  Your  slave  states  are  poor  —  that  they  are  cursed 
with  slavery.  .  .  .  What  branch  of  industry  of  Massachusetts 
is  there  that  has  not  been  protected,  from  1789  until  this  day, 
by  duties,  by  legislation  shaped  for  that  purpose,  and  that  pur 
pose  mainly !  New  York,  her  Senator  boasts,  waves  the  wand 
of  commerce,  and  everything  is  turned  to  gold.  Sir,  if  this 
were  all  the  wand  she  waved,  her  prosperity  would  be  a  sub 
ject  of  unalloyed  pleasure  to  all  her  confederates;  but  with  her 
political  power  she  strikes  the  rock  of  the  public  treasury,  and 
a  stream  of  public  treasure  pours  into  her  lap.  .  .  .  We  of 
the  South  have  sought  none  of  these  unjust  advantages.  We 
till  the  earth.  We  have  sought  no  protection  from  this  gov 
ernment  —  none  of  its  money.  ...  I  have  not  been  sent 
here  to  ask  the  public  money  on  behalf  of  my  constituents. 
For  eleven  years  since  I  have  been  in  the  two  houses  of 
Congress,  my  constituents  have  never  asked  me  to  introduce 
one  bill  for  the  benefit  of  their  industry,  their  pursuits,  neither 
special  nor  general;  and  I  have  never  introduced  one."  * 

These  bills  were  usually  passed  by  the  votes  of  the  North 
ern  Senators,  aided  by  those  from  Kentucky  and  Louisiana 
against  the  opposition  of  the  rest  of  the  Southerners. 

In  May,  1858,  the  issue  recurred  upon  a  motion  of  Mr. 
Wade  of  Ohio  to  take  up  and  tack  together  a  group  of  river- 
and-harbor  bills  with  a  view  to  expediting  their  passage. 
Toombs  in  opposing  the  bills  returned  the  rattling  fire  of  a 
dozen  other  Senators.  He  said: 

"My  object  is  to  refuse  such  appropriations  as  are  im 
properly  asked  for  by  the  government,  and  to  limit  it  to 
those  that  are  necessary.  That  is  the  only  true  road  to 
economy.  ...  As  far  as  my  inquiries  have  gone,  interest  is 

*  Congressional  Globe,  34th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  1805,  1806. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  137 

the  life-blood  of  these  applications.  Improvements  are  made 
for  the  benefit  of  owners  of  wharf  property,  owners  of  town 
sites,  who  desire  to  build  up  towns  by  spending  among  them 
selves  the  public  money.  ...  It  is  an  unjust  system;  it 
is  a  wrong  system;  it  is  an  indefensible  system.  Gentle 
men  talk  of  nationality,  and  now  and  then  they  throw  in  a 
glorification  for  the  Union.  These  are  the  clap-traps  by 
which  they  extort  the  labors  of  the  poor  for  the  benefit  of 
the  rich.  The  masses  throughout  the  United  States,  who 
are  referred  to  by  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  the 
laboring  men,  are  taxed  upon  their  sugar  and  other  commodi 
ties  as  much  as  the  rich  man;  but  they  do  not  own  town  lots; 
they  do  not  own  fronts  on  Chicago  river;  they  do  not  own 
eight  hundred  thousand  dollars'  worth  of  wharf  property,  like 
Gerritt  Smith,  at  Oswego.  .  .  .  The  Senator  from  Vermont 
says  it  is  difficult  to  get  a  just  system  of  taxation.  I  admit 
it.  I  admit  that  it  is  next  to  impossible  in  human  institu 
tions  to  get  a  just  system  of  taxation;  but  in  every  question 
that  comes  before  me  it  is  my  duty  as  a  Senator  and  as  a 
citizen  to  approximate  that  point  as  near  as  possible.  But 
the  moment  he  sees  there  is  a  difficulty,  he  gets  as  far  off 
from  it  as  possible.  That  is  the  difference  between  us.  ... 
As  a  fundamental  principle  of  human  justice,  I  will  apportion 
all  the  burdens  of  the  government  on  the  persons  who  get 
the  benefits,  as  exactly  and  as  equally  as  I  can.  Though  it 
be  imperfect,  if  I  am  legislating  to  that  point  I  am  legis 
lating  justly;  and  if  I  depart  from  it  I  am  legislating  un 
justly.  These  two  Senators  advocate  unjust  legislation.  .  .  . 
If  the  money  is  taken  out  of  the  public  treasury  there  is  not 
a  spot  in  the  United  States  where  the  shipowners  and  the 
merchants  will  not  ask  you  to  give  them  greater  facilities. 
But  make  them  pay  for  it  themselves,  and  they  will  count 
both  sides  —  the  advantages  on  the  one  side  and  the  dis 
advantages  on  the  other.  .  .  .  They  do  not  come  here  to 
beg  you  to  give  them  the  right  to  tax  themselves,  but  they 
beg  you  to  plunder  the  public  treasury  for  their  benefit. 
They  understand  it.  They  are  very  easily  satisfied  with 
arguments.  I  have  no  doubt  that  by  the  mercantile  classes, 
the  people  benefited  by  this  system,  the  arguments  of  the 
Senators  from  Louisiana  and  Vermont  will  be  considered 
unanswerable."  * 

*  Congressional  Globe,  35th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  2350-2352;  2380-2384. 


138  THE    LIFE   OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

When  the  debate  was  concluded,  the  more  important  bills 
in  the  group  were  passed  by  about  26  yeas,  including  all  the 
Republican  Senators,  against  about  17  nays,  including  all 
the  Southerners  but  Crittenden  and  Thompson  of  Kentucky 
and  Benjamin  of  Louisiana. 

Upon  all  similar  matters,  such  as  appropriations  for  build 
ing  and  maintaining  custom-houses,  mints  and  the  like, 
Toombs's  attitude  was  the  same  as  upon  the  river-and- 
harbor  bills.  He  refused,  for  example,  to  support  appro 
priations  for  the  maintenance  of  the  branch  mint  which  had 
been  established  at  Dahlonega,  Ga.,  twenty-five  years  before. 
"I  do  not  want  a  dollar  of  the  public  money  expended  on 
the  state  of  Georgia,"  he  said.  "If  you  are  going  to  spend 
money  wrongfully,  if  you  are  going  to  spend  money  profli 
gately,  I  wish  you  to  do  it  anywhere  else  but  within  the 
limits  of  my  own  state."  * 

On  the  other  hand  he  maintained  that  just  obligations 
ought  to  be  discharged  with  scrupulous  honesty,  including 
the  payment  of  interest  upon  claims  where  it  had  been 
officially  promised  in  case  of  delay  in  the  payment  of  the 
principal.  The  squanderers  were  of  course  on  the  lookout 
for  some  item  in  Toombs's  own  career  upon  which  they  might 
base  a  tu  quoque  argument.  The  only  thing  discovered  which 
they  could  possibly  distort  into  such  a  use  was  his  course 
upon  the  Galphin  claim;  and  with  this  they  taunted  him, 
regardless  of  the  merits  of  the  case.  These  allusions  merely 
drew  from  Toombs  vehement  defenses  of  the  justice  of  his 
course;  but  they  served  their  sinister  purpose  to  some 
extent  in  weakening  the  popular  force  of  Toombs's  appeal 
for  honest  policy. 

The  Galphin  claim  had  impressed  Toombs  as  meritorious 

at  the  time  of  his  first  entrance  into  public  life;   and  he  had 

unflaggingly  supported  it  until  the  time  of  its  full  settlement. 

George  Galphin  had  been  a  prominent  Indian-trader  on  the 

*  Congressional  Globe,  35th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  1217. 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  139 

Savannah  river  in  the  period  just  prior  to  and  during  the 
American  Revolution.  In  1773  the  Creek  and  Cherokee 
tribes  had  become  heavily  indebted  to  Galphin  and  other 
traders;  and  in  that  year  when  they  ceded  a  great  tract  of 
land  to  the  British  government  they  stipulated  that  the 
moneys  arising  from  the  sale  of  these  lands  to  settlers  should 
be  applied  by  Great  Britain  in  payment  of  such  debts  as 
might  be  found  due  from  them  to  the  traders.  The  value 
of  the  lands  was  ample  to  cover  the  debts.  Galphin  was 
found  by  the  British  commissioners  to  have  a  just  claim 
under  this  adjustment  of  £9791,  155.  5d.,  and  was  given  a 
certificate  to  that  effect,  May  2,  1775.  The  commissioners 
disposed  of  some  of  the  lands  but  had  paid  Galphin  nothing 
when  the  Revolution  began,  in  which  Galphin  played  a 
prominent  part  as  an  advocate  of  American  Independence. 
In  1790  the  British  government  made  an  appropriation  for 
the  payment  of  the  debts  due  the  traders,  although  the  lands 
had  been  lost  to  British  jurisdiction;  but  on  account  of 
Galphin's  having  been  a  rebel,  the  claim  of  his  executor  was 
denied  by  the  British  authorities.  Meanwhile  the  state  of 
Georgia  had  granted  large  portions  of  these  lands  in  military 
bounties  and  settlers'  head-rights.  In  1780  the  Georgia  legis 
lature  asserted  the  right  of  the  state  to  the  land,  and  pro 
vided  that  people  having  claims  against  these  lands  should 
lay  their  accounts  before  that  or  some  future  legislature, 
and  that  all  claims  found  just  and  proper  and  due  to  the 
friends  of  America  should  be  paid  in  treasury  certificates 
payable  in  two,  three  and  four  years,  and  bearing  six  per 
cent  interest.  Thomas  Galphin,  son  and  executor  of  George 
Galphin,  presented  the  Galphin  claim  to  the  legislature  in 
1789,  and  a  favorable  committee  report  was  made  upon  it, 
but  no  action  was  taken  by  the  legislature.  After  its  re 
jection  by  the  British  authorities  the  claim  was  again  pre 
sented  to  the  Georgia  legislature  in  1793.  A  committee 
approved  it  emphatically  and  the  report  was  agreed  to  by 


140  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  Senate;  but  the  House  did  not  act.  The  claim  was 
renewed  at  many  subsequent  sessions,  and  committees 
reported  in  most  cases  favorably,  and  in  some  approving 
the  payment  of  interest  as  well  as  principal;  but  the  legis 
lature  took  no  action.  Many  persons  considered  that  the 
claim  lay  more  properly  against  the  federal  government 
than  against  Georgia,  because  much  of  the  land  had  been 
used  in  promoting  the  common  defense,  and  because  of  the 
assumption  of  state  debts  by  Congress  in  1790.  Although 
the  time  allowed  by  the  assumption  act  for  the  presentation 
of  state  accounts  had  lapsed  without  the  presentation  of 
the  Galphin  claim,  it  was  noted  that  Congress  assumed 
additional  debts  of  Virginia  in  1832,  and  it  was  thought  by 
many  who  recognized  the  justice  of  the  Galphin  claim  that 
it  should  be  similarly  settled.  Governor  Schley  so  advised 
President  Jackson  in  1836. 

Toombs  as  a  member  of  the  Georgia  legislature  thought 
it  a  reproach  to  the  state  and  the  nation  that  the  claim  was 
still  unpaid.  In  the  session  of  1838  he  introduced  a  petition 
from  Milledge  Galphin,  who  then  represented  the  claimants, 
and  had  it  referred  to  a  committee  with  himself  as  chairman. 
This  committee  reported  in  a  bill  for  the  relief  of  the  Galphin 
heirs,  and  also  a  set  of  resolutions  requesting  Congress  to 
reimburse  the  state  for  such  outlay  as  should  be  made. 
The  legislature  then  took  no  action;  but  at  its  session  of 
1839  directed  the  governor  to  appoint  a  commission  to 
examine  and  report  upon  this  and  other  claims.  The  report 
of  this  commission  was  received  in  December,  1840,  and 
referred  to  a  committee  with  Toombs  as  a  member.  The 
majority  of  this  committee,  composed  of  Democrats,  who  as 
a  party  in  the  state  at  that  time  were  disposed  to  be  irre 
sponsible,  reported  that  the  state  was  not  bound  in  justice 
or  equity  to  pay  the  claim.  The  minority,  Toombs,  T.  M. 
Berrien  and  A.  H.  Chappell,  argued  the  question  at  length 
in  their  report,  and  asserted  that  the  state  was  justly  in- 


A    SENATOR   IN   THE    FIFTIES  141 

debted  and  ought  to  pay  principal  and  interest  at  six  per 
cent,  at  least  from  January  i,  1781.  The  House  agreed  to 
the  majority  report,  Toombs  and  Stephens  voting  no. 

When  Toombs  went  to  Congress  he  carried  with  him  his 
advocacy  of  the  Galphin  claim.  In  the  Senate,  bills  for  the 
satisfaction  of  the  claim  were  passed  at  several  sessions, 
and  finally  in  1848  one  of  these  bills  was  passed  by  the 
House  and  approved  by  the  President.  The  bill  author 
ized  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  "examine  and  adjust" 
the  claim  and  "to  pay  the  amount  which  may  be  found 
due,  to  Milledge  Galphin,  executor."  The  then  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  Mr.  Walker,  referred  the  claim  to  one  of 
the  auditors  in  the  Treasury  Department  for  examination, 
and  this  auditor  reported  that  both  principal  and  interest 
ought  to  be  paid.  Mr.  Walker,  however,  whose  term  was 
just  expiring,  directed  that  the  principal  only  should  be 
paid;  and  left  the  question  of  the  interest  to  be  settled  by 
his  successor.  In  the  incoming  cabinet  of  President  Taylor, 
Meredith  of  Pennsylvania  was  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
Reverdy  Johnson  of  Maryland,  Attorney  General,  and 
George  W.  Crawford  of  Georgia,  Secretary  of  War.  Now 
Crawford  had  been  engaged  since  1832  as  the  attorney  of 
the  Galphin  heirs  to  prosecute  their  claim,  to  receive  for 
his  services  a  contingent  fee  of  one-half  the  amount  re 
covered.  Upon  entering  the  cabinet  he  retained  his  interest 
in  the  claim,  but  employed  another  attorney  to  handle  it, 
and  informed  no  one  in  the  administration  but  the  President 
of  his  interest  in  it.  Taylor  told  him  that  he  saw  no  im 
propriety  in  the  course  he  was  pursuing.  When  the  claim 
for  interest  was  brought  before  Meredith  he  first  referred 
it  to  an  auditor  who  recommended  that  it  be  disallowed. 
He  then  asked  the  opinion  of  the  Attorney  General,  who 
advised  that  the  interest  be  paid;  and  in  accordance  with 
the  latter  advice  he  paid  the  claim  for  interest,  amounting 
to  $191,352.89,  in  March,  1850. 


142  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Soon  afterward  the  fact  reached  the  press  that  the  Secre 
tary  of  War  had  received  a  great  sum  as  attorney  for  the 
claimants,  and  a  great  newspaper  outcry  was  raised.  Secre 
tary  Crawford  thereupon  requested  the  Speaker  of  the  House 
to  direct  a  committee  to  investigate  his  conduct.  This 
committee  of  nine  presented  on  May  17,  1850,  a  narrative 
of  the  history  of  the  claim  and  of  Crawford's  connection 
therewith,  but  no  majority  of  the  committee  agreeing  in 
any  one  set  of  recommendations  in  the  premises,  three  partly 
conflicting  minority  reports  were  presented.*  In  the  course 
of  a  heated  debate,  Toombs  moved  on  July  I  a  resolution 
that  there  had  been  no  evidence  submitted  by  the  commit 
tee  which  impugned  Crawford's  personal  or  official  conduct 
in  relation  to  the  settlement  of  the  claim  by  the  proper 
officers  of  the  government.  This,  with  an  amendment 
guarding  against  the  precedent,  was  lost  by  82  yeas  to  92 
nays,  July  6.  In  the  following  week  the  House  adopted 
resolutions  by  majorities  of  about  two  to  one  that  the  Gal- 
phin  claim  had  not  been  a  just  one  against  the  United 
States;  that  the  act  of  Congress  had  made  it  the  duty  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  pay  the  principal  of  the  claim; 
but  that  the  payment  of  the  interest  on  the  claim  had  not 
been  done  in  conformity  with  law  or  precedent.  Toombs, 
of  course,  and  most  of  his  Whig  colleagues,  voted  in  the 
negative  in  each  instance.  In  Toombs's  mind  the  whole 
episode  was  a  commentary  upon  the  handling  of  just  claims 
by  irresponsible  governments  much  more  than  upon  the 
conduct  of  his  friend  Crawford.  He  was  outspoken  in 
endorsing  the  settlement  of  the  claim,  and  when  challenged 
in  after  years  was  always  ready  to  defend  it  anew. 

An  instance  of  this,  exhibiting  Toombs's  manner  and  his 
attitude  upon  other  things  as  well  as  the  Galphin  claim, 
occurred  in  the  course  of  a  debate  on  public  printing,  on 
May  13,  1858,  precipitated  by  a  proposal  of  Mr.  Doolittle 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  3ist.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  546-556. 


A    SENATOR    IN   THE    FIFTIES  143 

of  Wisconsin  to  provide  extra  pay  for  the  reporters  in 
the  Senate.*  Toombs  spoke  slightingly  of  the  value  of  the 
Congressional  Globe.  "Now,"  said  he,  "one  half  of  the 
debates  here  are  of  no  consequence  to  the  country  or  to 
anybody.  .  .  .  Why,  sir,  you  would  have  to  give  a  great 
many  persons  in  the  country  ten  dollars  a  day  to  read  the 
Globe.  Nobody  reads  it.  I  think  it  is  a  good  burial  place." 
He  then  took  up  personal  themes: 

"Gentlemen  have  spoken  about  speeches  being  retained. 
Well,  I  suppose  I  have  a  trunk  full  of  them  now.  In  the 
variety  of  my  engagements  in  the  Senate  here,  in  my  office, 
at  home,  attending  to  my  duties  in  this  body,  attending  to 
the  public  interest,  and  trying  to  prevent  this  very  thing  of 
plundering  the  treasury,  I  had  not  time  frequently,  espe 
cially  at  the  latter  part  of  a  session,  to  look  over  and  correct 
the  inaccurate  reports  of  my  remarks,  and  so  they  were 
laid  aside  for  some  other  time.  .  .  .  But,  sir,  the  point  I 
made  in  this  case  was  not  whether  the  reporting  was  good 
or  bad.  .  .  .  The  question  I  made  here  is  one  which  no 
Senator  has  thought  proper  to  meet,  except  the  honorable 
Senator  from  Mississippi  [Mr.  Brown],  and  he  has  taken  a  very 
curious  view  of  it.  He  almost  accuses  me  with  filching  money 
from  Mr.  Rives's  pocket  because  I  will  not  pay  his  workmen, 
when  I  pay  him  to  pay  them.  ...  I  say  it  is  filching  money 
out  of  the  public  treasury,  contrary  to  law  and  justice.  .  .  . 
I  do  not  believe  today  there  is  as  corrupt  a  government  under 
the  heavens  as  that  of  these  United  States. 

"Mr.  Hale.     Nor  I  either. 

"Several  other  Senators.     I  agree  to  that. 

"Mr.  Toombs.  And  most  of  all  its  corruption  is  in  the 
legislative  department.  .  .  . 

"Mr.  Doolittle.  The  honorable  Senator  from  Georgia  has 
been  pleased  to  make  some  allusion  to  myself  personally.  .  .  . 
Sir,  the  history  of  that  Senator  is  known  upon  various 
public  measures;  and  it  may  be  well  for  him  not  to  push 
that  matter  too  far. 

"Mr.  Toombs.  Any  extent  whatever,  sir.  I  defy  all 
scrutiny. 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  35th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  pp.  357-360. 


144  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

"Mr.  Doolittle.  Has  the  honorable  Senator  ever  heard  of 
Galphinism? 

"Mr.  Toombs.     I  have. 

"Mr.  Doolittle.  Mr.  President,  I  do  not  desire  to  enter 
into  a  personal  controversy  here  with  this  Senator.  It  is 
not  my  purpose  to  do  it.  But  I  give  him  to  understand  that 
I  do  not  receive  these  lectures  as  addressed  to  myself  per 
sonally.  .  .  . 

"Mr.  Toombs.  The  Senator  from  Wisconsin  asks  me  if  I 
have  heard  of  Galphinism.  I  desire  an  explanation  from 
him  on  that  subject.  If  he  charges  me,  in  connection  with 
any  branch  of  public  service,  now  or  at  any  time,  with  any 
improper  action  on  any  public  transaction  whatever,  I  wish 
to  know  it. 

"Mr.  Doolittle.  In  relation  to  the  subject  of  Galphinism, 
and  the  claim  from  which  that  name  was  derived,  I  under 
stand  that  the  honorable  Senator  —  I  may  be  misinformed 
as  to  the  fact  —  in  the  House  of  Representatives  advocated 
that  claim,  about  which  so  much  was  said  at  the  time.  I  do 
not  impugn  the  motives  of  the  Senator  in  doing  it;  but  if  I 
am  misinformed  as  to  the  fact,  I  am  willing  to  be  corrected. 

"Mr.  Toombs.  This  is  rather  an  extraordinary  way  of 
dealing  with  public  questions,  for  a  Senator  to  make  an 
allusion  without  intending  an  imputation.  I  do  not  under 
stand  it  that  way.  .  .  .  You  are  not  at  all  mistaken  in  the 
fact.  When  that  interest  was  allowed,  I  defended  it  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  and  I  defend  it  here.  I  know  that 
the  then  Secretary  of  War  came  to  the  House  of  Represent 
atives  and  demanded  that  the  question  be  referred  to  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  pledging  himself  to 
refund  the  money  if  the  decision  was  not  affirmed  by  the 
highest  tribunal  of  his  country;  and  a  partisan  majority  in 
this  House  put  it  down.  I  suppose  the  gentleman  got  his 
information  from  his  allies;  and  I  dare  say  millions  of  dollars 
have  been  stolen  in  this  country  under  the  cry  of  Galphin 
ism.  It  is  the  common  cry  when  there  is  a  desire  to  plunder 
the  public  treasury.  .  .  .  This  cry  I  know  has  been  the 
common  slosh  of  party  newspapers,  but  I  did  not  expect  to 
hear  it  in  the  Senate,  unless  from  a  gentleman  who  knew 
enough  about  the  claim  to  point  out  what  was  wrong  in  it, 
wherein  it  violated  public  principle.  I  voted  for  it  and  I 
glory  in  it  as  an  act  of  justice  and  right.  .  .  ." 


A    SENATOR    IN   THE    FIFTIES  145 

Another  case  in  which  Toombs  battled  valiantly  for  his 
standard  of  justice  was  that  of  the  naval  officers  removed 
from  service  through  the  action  of  the  "Naval  Retiring 
Board"  of  1855.  An  act,  approved  February  28,  authorized 
the  President  to  appoint  a  board  of  fifteen  naval  officers 
to  examine  the  efficiency  of  the  officers  of  the  navy  and 
report  to  the  President,  to  be  stricken  from  the  rolls  or 
placed  on  the  retired  list,  the  names  of  such  officers  as 
should  be  judged  incapable  of  efficient  performance  of  duty 
both  ashore  and  afloat.  The  board  when  organized  adopted 
an  exaggerated  interpretation  of  its  functions,  and  applied 
summary  process  in  its  transactions.  In  sittings  during 
one  month  it  passed  upon  the  qualifications  of  all  the  seven 
hundred  officers  in  the  navy.  It  then  recommended  the 
dismissal  of  above  fifty  of  these  for  incompetence  and  the 
transfer  of  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  others  to  the  retired 
list,  ranging  from  commodores  to  lieutenants  and  masters, 
and  including  the  celebrated  Matthew  F.  Maury.  The 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  when  transmitting  this  report  to  the 
President  stated  that  in  his  judgment  the  board  had  com 
mitted  many  errors,  but  on  the  whole  he  considered  that  the 
execution  of  its  findings  would  be  beneficial  to  the  navy. 
The  President  undiscriminatingly  endorsed  the  whole  of 
the  findings,  and  then  as  by  law  required,  proceeded  to 
fill  the  vacancies  caused  by  these  wholesale  dismissals  and 
retirements.  To  do  this  he  promoted  the  officers  remaining 
on  the  active-service  list,  including  of  course  the  members 
of  the  recent  Naval  Retiring  Board.  Next  winter  Congress 
was  flooded  with  petitions  from  the  aggrieved  victims.  The 
House  was  in  the  throes  of  a  dead-locked  Speaker's  election, 
and  the  brunt  of  the  business  fell  upon  the  Senate. 

It  was  brought  out  upon  inquiry  that  the  board  had  made 
no  record  of  its  proceedings  and  had  assigned  no  reasons 
for  its  decisions.  In  January,  1856,  Mason  of  Virginia  and 
Hale  of  New  Hampshire  made  vigorous  attacks  upon  the 


146  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

transaction,  which  was  defended  by  Mallory  of  Florida, 
chairman  of  the  committee  on  the  navy,  and  by  Benjamin 
of  Louisiana.  In  February  the  onslaught  was  renewed,  with 
Toombs  as  the  leader.  On  February  2,  in  a  speech  on  the 
Naval  Retiring  Board  he  said: 

"This  being  a  court  of  special  and  limited  jurisdiction,  it 
became  important  that  they  should  have  kept  a  record,  and 
that  record  should  have  shown  that  each  case  on  which 
they  acted  was  within  the  operation  of  the  law.  ...  It 
will  not  be  pretended  that  under  the  law  they  could  strike 
a  man  from  the  rolls  for  whatever  cause  they  thought  proper. 
.  .  .  They  were  to  confine  themselves  to  the  question  of 
his  capacity  to  perform  his  duties  on  shore  and  at  sea.  If 
they  went  beyond  that  their  proceedings  were  null  and  void. 
Then,  sir,  as  it  became  important  that  their  proceedings 
under  this  act  should  show  that  they  had  not  exceeded 
their  jurisdiction,  these  proceedings  became  void  by  not 
showing  it.  ...  My  friend  from  Louisiana  has  admitted 
that  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  made  a  mistake.  By  that 
admission  the  whole  question  is  surrendered.  His  instruc 
tions  to  the  board  gave,  or  presumed  to  give  to  them,  an 
authority  which  the  law  did  not  confer.  His  adopting  their 
proceedings  as  a  whole,  with  the  admission  that  their  find 
ing  in  some  cases  was  wrong,  was  fatal  to  the  whole  action 
of  the  board." 

After  further  debate  Toombs  grew  more  vehement.  On 
February  13  he  said: 

"The  gentleman  [Mr.  Mallory]  says  that  he  supposed 
Senators  would  hear  the  complaints  of  those  who  might 
suffer  from  the  action  of  this  board.  I  thank  God  that  such 
is  the  truth,  and  that  there  can  be  no  injustice  done  to  a 
great  body  of  faithful  public  servants  in  this  country  when 
there  will  not  be  found  willing  ears  to  hear  and  redress  it  in 
the  American  Senate.  ...  I  stand  here  today  not  only  to 
do  these  petitioners  justice,  but  to  defend  a  great  and  sacred 
principle  of  human  justice.  It  is  older  than  time;  it  is 
Heaven-born;  recognized  of  all  nations;  plead  by  the 
Apostle  Paul  against  the  injustice  of  his  judges.  He  declared 
it  was  not  the  manner  of  the  Romans  to  condemn  any  man 


A    SENATOR    IN   THE    FIFTIES  147 

unless  he  was  brought  face  to  face  to  his  accusers.  .  .  . 
These  rights  I  demand  for  these  petitioners  today;  and 
they  shall  have  them.  [Applause  from  the  galleries.]  .  .  . 
Give  me  the  record  —  the  law,  universal  justice  demands  it; 
give  me  the  record  —  even  the  Inquisition,  the  worst  tri 
bunal  which  ever  disgraced  humanity,  brought  its  victims 
face  to  face  with  their  accusers.  This  board  is  charged  with 
secretly  accusing  its  victims,  .  .  .  with  secretly  seeking 
informers  to  blast  the  fair  fame  of  their  brother  officers,  and 
then  with  concealing  from  them  the  nature  of  their  alleged 
crimes  and  the  witnesses  by  whom  they  were  supported.  .  .  . 
The  chairman  of  the  naval  committee  seems  to  expect  to 
avoid  these  demands  by  giving  us  what  he  deems  excellent 
reasons  for  retiring  old  captains,  and  amuses  us  with  the 
exploits  of  young  heroes.  It  seems  from  his  account  that 
we  had  many  more  captains  than  we  had  any  use  for.  ...  He 
deems  it  expedient,  as  there  is  nothing  for  so  many  old  cap 
tains  to  do,  to  help  the  matter  by  adding  thirty-odd  young 
and  vigorous  commanders  to  the  list,  in  order,  I  suppose,  to 
help  them  to  do  nothing.  .  .  .  Here  lies,  I  fear,  the  true  diffi 
culty  in  the  case  —  an  impatience  for  promotion.  .  .  .  But, 
sir,  to  retire  an  efficient  officer  is  dishonorable.  .  .  .  They 
demand  the  justice  of  their  country;  and  I  stand  here  this 
day  to  require  it,  and  I  will  continue  to  demand  it  as  long  as 
I  have  the  constitutional  right  to  do  so  on  this  floor." 

The  discussion  was  again  resumed  in  July,  when  Toombs 
laid  especial  stress  on  the  fact  that  the  board  had  dismissed 
certain  officers  on  the  ground  of  immorality.  "When  you 
put  a  man  on  trial  for  immorality,"  he  said,  "the  law  is  made 
in  the  breast  of  the  judges.  .  .  .  You  leave  it  undefined, 
which  I  need  not  say  is  the  worst  provision  of  a  penal  law." 
He  continued:  "My  friend  from  Louisiana  said  the  other 
day  that  he  could  hardly  argue  this  question  with  me,  because 
I  am  apt  to  get  excited  upon  it.  ...  In  defiance  of  all 
justice,  of  all  right,  and,  as  I  say,  of  the  fundamental  prin 
ciples  of  liberty  everywhere,  they  tried  their  comrades, 
condemned  them,  and  took  their  places.  I  did  become 
indignant,  and  I  thank  God  I  am  indignant  at  such  injus- 


148  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

tice,  and  I  hope  I  shall  ever  remain  so."  *  The  issue  was  settled 
at  length  by  an  act  in  January,  1857,  providing  for  a  board 
of  inquiry  to  examine  the  qualifications  of  the  petitioning 
officers  and  their  reinstatement  in  case  of  favorable  findings. 

Another  instance  of  Toombs's  non-sectional  and  non- 
partisan  devotion  to  justice  was  in  the  Iowa  contested 
senatorial  election  of  1856-57.  The  election  of  Harlan,  a 
Republican,  was  being  contested  on  a  technicality,  and 
virtually  all  the  Democrats  in  the  Senate,  except  Toombs, 
were  opposed  to  his  being  seated.  Toombs,  in  spite  of 
his  belief  that  the  Republican  politicians  were  essentially 
hypocritical  and  that  the  tendencies  of  their  party  were 
pernicious,  maintained  that  Harlan  had  been  truly  elected 
and  was  entitled  to  his  seat.  He  delivered  one  of  the  strong 
est  speeches  of  his  whole  career  in  support  of  Harlan's  claim, 
January,  1857,  and  voted  with  the  Republicans  in  Harlan's 
behalf,  only  to  be  overridden  by  the  Democratic  majority.! 

And  finally,  upon  the  tariff  issue,  which  has  been  second 
only  to  that  of  slavery  in  promoting  sectional  antagonism 
in  American  politics,  the  attitude  of  Toombs  throughout 
his  congressional  career  was  probably  less  influenced  by  local 
and  sectional  considerations  than  that  of  any  other  leading 
public  man  of  his  time.  His  community  had  nothing  to 
gain  and  much  to  lose  by  tariff  protection  in  any  form. 
But  Toombs  consistently  maintained  that  a  moderate 
discrimination  for  the  sake  of  protection  was  legitimate  and 
wholesome  in  promoting  the  economic  strength  of  the  nation. 
His  early  expressions  in  this  line  have  been  sketched  in  a 
previous  chapter.  His  latest  one,  made  in  the  Senate  on 
February  9,  1859,  was  a  ripened  exposition  of  the  same 
doctrine.  Demonstrating  the  fallacies  of  the  Pennsylvania 

*  Congressional  Globe,  34th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  243,  408,  409,  1621, 
1622. 

t  Described  in  J.  C.  Reed,  The  Brothers'  War,  pp.  240-242;  Congressional 
Globe,  35th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  240-244. 


A    SENATOR    IN   THE    FIFTIES  149 

Senators,  indulging  in  no  invective,  but  abounding  in 
aphorisms  of  sound  philosophy  upon  many  phases  of  politics, 
it  showed  that  the  vicissitudes  of  thirteen  years  had  not 
disturbed  his  position.  In  concluding  the  speech  he  said: 

"The  school  in  which  I  was  brought  up  a  protective  Whig 
[taught]  that  we  were  to  raise  no  more  revenue  than  the 
economical  wants  of  the  government  required,  and  in  levy 
ing  that  revenue  to  discriminate  for  our  infant  manufactures. 
What  for?  That  we  might  divert  capital  into  them,  that 
we  might  prevent  them  from  being  crushed  in  their  infancy. 
Well,  sir,  when  is  the  iron  manufacture  going  to  get  grown? 
I  want  to  know.  That  was  the  ground  it  was  put  on  in 
1842.  I  want  to  know  when  the  iron  interest  will  ever 
attain  its  majority.  It  has  had,  taking  the  fluctations  in 
duties  and  prices,  as  much  as  one  hundred  and  fifty  per  cent 
protection  for  forty-three  years  —  from  1816  to  this  day. 
Have  they  not  had  enough  experience  in  making  iron?  .  .  . 
"I  have  stated  that  the  tariff  of  1857  was  a  tariff  for  revenue, 
discriminating  for  protection.  It  discriminated  largely. 
At  that  period  we  found  our  revenues  abundant,  and  we 
determined  to  readjust  the  tariff  system  so  as  to  lessen  the 
revenues.  My  friend  from  Virginia  and  myself,  and  gentle 
men  all  over  the  country,  with  different  views  of  protection 
and  free  trade,  said  that  as  the  country  was  generally  pros 
perous,  as  we  must  reduce  our  revenue,  we  were  content 
that  even  advantages  should  be  had.  The  woolen  manufac 
turing  interest  said  that  we  had  allowed  a  duty  of  thirty  per 
cent  on  wool  which  had  worked  hard  on  them;  and  they 
asked  us  to  give  them  coarse  wool  free  of  duty,  that  they 
might  compete  with  England,  and  to  put  woolens  in  the 
highest  schedule.  We  did  it;  and  they  went  on  their  way 
rejoicing.  We  dealt  fairly  by  every  branch  of  industry. 
The  Senator  from  New  York  [Mr.  Seward],  the  representa 
tive  not  of  free  trade,  but  of  free  soil  and  protection,  was  a 
member  of  the  committee  of  conference  on  that  bill,  and  it 
received  the  approbation  of  his  judgment.  .  .  . 

"  But  because  a  monetary  convulsion  has  overtaken  the 
country  and  because  protection  entered  into  a  state  election, 
the  whole  world  is  to  be  disturbed;  and  our  revenue  system, 
which  you  agreed  upon  as  a  national  settlement,  is  to  be 


150  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

readjusted.  I  say  it  was  a  national  settlement,  because  all 
sections  harmonized  upon  it,  and  I  congratulated  the  country 
at  the  time  that  Massachusetts  and  South  Carolina,  East 
and  West,  North  and  South,  all  united  in  favor  of  it.  All 
the  Senators  in  this  body  except  eight,  and  two-thirds  of  the 
members  of  an  opposition  House,  deliberately  said:  'We 
will  make  this  hereafter  a  financial  question,  not  a  party 
one;  and  we  will  put  it  on  this  basis.'  But  now  the  Senator 
from  Pennsylvania  tells  us  —  and  we  are  told  by  the  govern 
ment  organs  —  that  we  must  have  a  readjustment  of  the 
tariff;  that  although  it  has  had  but  little  over  a  year  of 
unparalleled  commercial  disaster  to  test  it,  it  must  be  altered 
now.  Well,  I  know  not  what  you  can  get  now.  I  know 
not  whether  gentlemen  here  are  ready  to  eat  their  own  words. 
I  have  seen  a  great  many  strange  sights  in  my  time.  I  am 
not  ready  to  do  it.  I  believed  at  the  time  it  was  a  wise  act; 
I  believe  so  now.  I  believe  it  gave  fully  as  much  protection 
to  American  industry  as  ought  to  be  given.  .  .  . 

"A  great  majority  of  the  Southern  people  believe  that  every 
burden  you  impose,  every  percentage  you  lay,  is  injurious 
to  their  interests.  It  certainly  enhances  the  prices  of  all 
articles  they  consume.  Still  they  say  they  are  willing  to 
make  that  concession,  for  common  interests,  and  for  com 
mon  glory."  * 

Upon  many  other  matters  in  the  Senate  routine,  which 
cannot  be  treated  within  the  limits  of  the  present  volume, 
Toombs's  nnrbftprtignnl  services  were  equally  sound,  patri 
otic  and  striking.  This  phase  of  his  career  has  been  char 
acterized  with  justifiable  enthusiasm  by  Col.  Reed  as 
follows:  f 

"He  challenged  every  bad  and  defended  every  good  meas 
ure.  He  is  on  record  both  by  speech,  nearly  always  hitting 
the  nail  on  the  head,  and  by  vote,  nearly  always  right,  upon 
every  one.  .  .  .  The  alert  and  intelligent  vigilance  which 
he  gives  every  measure  proposed  seems  superior  to  that  of 
all  his  colleagues.  They  acknowledge  this  by  the  many 

*  Congressional  Globe,  35th.  Cong.,  2d.  sess.,  pp.  902,  903. 
t  John  C.  Reed,  The  Brothers'  War>  pp.  234-251,  passim.     (Copyrighted 
by  Little,  Brown  &  Co.) 


A    SENATOR    IN   THE    FIFTIES  151 

inquiries  they  make  of  him  for  information  as  to  pending 
bills.  ...  He  shows  a  like  readiness  upon  facts  of  history 
—  especially  English  and  American  —  on  clauses  of  the  Con 
stitution,  or  statutes  or  treaties,  provisions  of  the  law  of 
nations,  principles  of  political  economy,  institutions,  commer 
cial  systems,  customs  of  particular  nations,  and  all  such 
topics  as  may  illustrate  the  pending  question,  however  sud 
denly  it  may  have  arisen.  And  so  he  discusses  every  matter, 
grave  or  trivial,  with  perfect  grasp  of  the  proposition  sub 
mitted,  and  with  fullness  of  knowledge  and  understanding. 
He  avoids  strained  and  over-ingenious  reasoning.  Plain 
and  safe  men  never  disparaged  his  arguments  by  calling 
them  hair-splitting  or  metaphysical.  But  though  he  took  his 
stand  upon  the  palpable  meaning  of  undisputed  facts  and  the 
most  plainly  applicable  doctrines  of  reason  and  justice,  he 
displayed  an  unparalleled  power  of  formulating  in  intelligi 
ble  and  striking  words  the  key  principles  of  common  affairs. 
This  gift  always  found  instant  appreciation  with  practical 
men,  and  they  admired  it  as  genius.  Though  he  has  his  eye 
ever  open  to  principle  he  is  the  very  opposite  of  the  mere 
doctrinaire.  He  is  practical,  and  always  pushing  business 
on  except  when  the  bills  for  depleting  the  treasury  —  to  use 
his  favorite  name  for  them  —  are  up  and  likely  to  pass 
because  of  the  coalition  between  the  opposition  and  the 
fishy  Democrats,  which  he  is  always  exposing  with  exhaust- 
less  variety  of  language.  Only  then  he  prefers  to  do  nothing. 
As  to  his  own  measures,  he  changes  words,  accepts  amend 
ments  —  in  short,  makes  every  concession  which  will  give 
him  the  substance  of  his  desire.  ...  In  important  debate 
he  is  conspicuously  the  strongest  man  in  the  Senate.  .  .  . 

"Many  have  been  superior  to  Toombs  in  making  perfect 
orations,  but  it  is  hard  to  find  in  any  deliberative  body  a 
match  for  him  as  a  debater.  Charles  Fox  was  a  giant;  but 
he  did  not  have  the  strength,  the  grip,  the  never  remitted 
activity,  the  infinite  thrust,  the  parry,  illustration,  wit, 
epigram,  and  invincible  appeal  to  conscience,  feeling  and 
reason  —  in  short,  the  complete  supply  and  command  of  all 
resources  that  marked  Toombs  as  foremost  in  the  pancra 
tium  of  parliamentary  discussion.  It  ought  to  add  inex 
pressible  brightness  to  his  fame  that  he  sought  for  no  tri 
umphs  except  those  of  justice  and  good  policy.  He  was  far 
more  than  a  mere  logician  in  debate.  His  brilliant  snatches, 


152  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

his  sudden  uprisings,  his  thawing  humor  and  flashing  wit  — 
all  these  did  their  parts  as  effectively  in  winning  favor  and 
working  suasion  as  his  array  of  facts  and  his  ratiocination 
did  theirs  in  convincing.  He  was  too  prone  to  use  harsh 
language  towards  the  other  side.  There  are  many  places 
in  his  speeches  where  I  wish  he  had  used  soft  instead  of 
bitter  words.  .  .  .  Yet  in  spite  of  his  occasional  vehemence 
and  acrimonious  language,  he  seems  to  have  the  respect 
and  regard  of  even  his  most  decided  political  opponents. 
Wade  and  he  recognized  each  the  great  merit  of  the  other. 
Once  after  applauding  his  honesty  and  his  frankness,  Toombs 
says  of  him:  'He  and  I  can  agree  about  everything  upon 
earth  until  we  get  to  our  sable  population,  I  do  believe.' 
(March  22,  1858.)  Wade  had  already  said  this  of  Toombs: 
'I  commend  the  bold  and  direct  manner  in  which  the  Senator 
from  Georgia  always  attacks  his  opponents/  (February  28, 
1857.)  February  8,  1858,  Fessenden  said,  'I  am  very  happy 
to  get  that  admission  from  the  Senator  from  Georgia.  It  is 
made  with  his  customary  frankness  and  clearness.'  Hale 
also  respects  him.  January  23,  1857,  he  says  that  Toombs 
ought  to  have  been  on  the  bench,  complimenting  his  desire 
for  justice  and  fairness  as  well  as  his  legal  ability.  The 
Northern  Democrat  Simmons  loves  to  praise  him,  as  is  evi 
denced  by  what  he  says,  June  2,  1858,  February  9,  1859,  and 
June  23,  1860.  Such  unsought  and  spontaneous  commen 
dations  of  the  great  Southern  partisan  by  Northern  men  dur 
ing  the  heat  of  sectional  agitation  are  extraordinarily  strong 
proofs  of  his  high  character  as  well  as  great  genius.  .  .  . 

"Taking  popularity  at  its  exact  worth;  candid  and  frank 
to  the  extreme;  contented  in  the  course  dictated  by  his 
judgment  and  conscience  though  opposed  by  his  people  or 
party  and  his  own  private  interests;  in  no  bargains  with 
men  nor  smirching  connections  with  women,  doing  nothing 
in  secret  which  if  published  would  bring  a  blush;  elevated 
above  the  amiable  weaknesses  of  unwise  benevolence,  ever 
championing  with  all  his  powers  the  righteous  cause  of  the 
weak  and  unpopular  —  as  exampled  in  his  maintaining  the 
claims  of  certain  persons  in  Louisiana  to  the  Houmas  land 
against  the  formidable  opposition  of  the  two  Senators  from 
that  state,  in  his  extraordinarily  eloquent  appeal  for  the 
naval  officers  retired  without  a  hearing,  in  his  heroic  endeavor 
to  have  his  party  seat  the  Republican  Harlan;  incorruptible 


A    SENATOR    IN    THE    FIFTIES  153 

and  really  consistent  forever  and  always  —  when  he  is 
scrutinized  as  a  public  man  his  character  rises  into  a  grand 
eur  of  unselfishness,  firmness  of  high  purpose,  honesty,  and 
power  to  show  and  do  the  right,  almost  superhuman.  .  .  . 

"Of  all  his  peers  he  was  most  at  home  in  the  ways  and 
principles  which  dictate  proper  legislation  as  to  trade  and 
business.  .  .  .  Ponder  these  stout-hearted  and  golden  words 
of  his:  ...  'Whenever  the  system  shall  be  firmly  estab 
lished  that  the  states  are  to  enter  into  a  miserable  scramble 
for  the  most  money  for  their  local  appropriations,  and  that 
Senator  is  to  be  regarded  the  ablest  representative  of  his 
state  who  can  get  for  it  the  largest  slice  of  the  treasury, 
from  that  day  public  honor  and  property  are  gone,  and  all 
the  states  are  disgraced  and  degraded.'  (February  27,  1857.) 
.  .  .  He  sees  that  the  appropriations  for  harbors,  rivers, 
lighthouses,  private  claims,  pensions,  etc.,  are  almost  as 
baneful  as  was  the  distribution  of  corn  to  the  Roman  popu 
lace;  and  yet  the  people  everywhere  are  eager  for  the  cor 
rupting  gifts.  Against  his  party,  against  many  of  this 
section,  he  fights  alone  and  single-handed,  reminding  of 
Horatio's  keeping  the  bridge  against  the  Etruscan  host. 
Though  always  outvoted,  he  behaves  with  spirit  and  dignity. 
Either  he,  or  some  one  of  the  faithful  few  who  act  with  him 
in  the  slim  minority,  always  have  the  yeas  and  nays  recorded. 
His  grand  purpose  was  to  appeal  to  the  American  people 
upon  an  issue  involving  the  article  of  his  creed  which  he  had 
held  up  with  so  much  puissance  and  fidelity  in  days  of  evil 
report.  These  words  contain  the  motto  of  the  long  contest 
which  occupied  all  of  his  non-sectional  career  in  the  Senate: 
'I  think  every  one  of  these  bills  should  be  considered.  I 
do  not  wish  to  have  them  considered  in  such  a  manner  as 
improperly  to  occupy  the  time  of  the  Senate.  I  desire  to 
spread  before  the  country  reasonable  information.  That 
is  the  only  purpose  we  can  have  now,  because  the  combina 
tion  is  sufficient  to  carry  everything  that  the  committee 
report.  But  there  is  a  day  of  reckoning  to  come;  and  I 
trust  that  those  who  support  this  system  will  be  called  to 
judgment.  I  desire  the  truth  to  go  to  the  honest  people  all 
over  the  country.  Let  the  taxpayers  look  at  this  matter;  let 
the  jobbers  beware.  "To  your  tents,  O  Israel."'  (July  29, 
1856.) 

"  The  sectional  agitation,  mounting  higher  and  higher,  as 


154  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Toombs  said  often,  blinded  the  people  to  this  great  subject 
Recession  came,  and  his  state  —  to  him  the  only  sovereign 
-  called  the  solitary  combatant  away  from  the  ground  that 
ought  to  be  kept  forever  in  loving  memory  for  his  lone 
desperate,  thrice-valiant  stand." 


CHAPTER  VII 
TOOMBS  ON  THE  SLAVEHOLDING  REGIME 

THE  same  promptings  of  conscience  and  patriotism 
which  made  Toombs  a  champion  of  justice  and  honesty 
and  the  national  interests  made  him  at  the  same  time  a 
champion  of  state  rights  and  the  right  of  the  Southern 
community  to  determine  its  own  institutions.  The  valor 
with  which  he  supported  the  petitions  of  the  aggrieved  naval 
officers  was  the  same  as  that  which  he  used  in  vindicating 
the  claims  of  the  South  for  security  against  the  operations 
of  the  "underground  railroad"  and  the  agitations  of  the 
abolitionists. 

Toombs  was  himself  the  owner  of  a  large  and  prosperous 
plantation  in  southwestern  Georgia  which  he  visited  with 
great  relish  as  often  as  his  congressional  duties,  his  law 
practise  and  his  campaigning  activities  permitted;  and  he 
was  in  intimate  touch  with  all  the  industrial  and  social 
phases  of  the  Southern  problem  of  race  relations.  In 
endorsement  of  the  institution  of  negro  slavery  under  the 
existing  conditions  he  put  himself  upon  record  in  addresses 
on  two  public  occasions,  the  first  as  part  of  the  Commence 
ment  exercises  of  Emory  College  at  Oxford,  Ga.,  July  20, 
1853;  the  second,  in  Tremont  Temple,  Boston,  Mass., 
January  24, 1856.  The  latter*  was  in  large  part  a  repetition 
of  the  former,  prefaced  by  a  review  of  the  political  strife  of 
the  sections.  The  former  is  selected  for  the  reprinting  of 
extracts  here  because  of  the  extreme  rarity  of  the  pamphlet 

*  Published  in  M.  W.  Clusky,  Political  Text-book,  pp.  571-582;  A.  H. 
Stephens,  War  Between  the  States,  I,  625-647. 


156  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

in  which  alone  it  was  published.*  Omitting  his  sketch  of 
the  early  history  of  slavery,  some  statistical  arguments,  a 
censure  upon  the  policy  of  Great  Britain,  and  some  local 
allusions,  the  address  was  as  follows: 

"  Public  opinion  has  always  been  a  recognised  element  in 
directing  the  affairs  of  the  world,  and  many  causes  have 
combined  in  our  day  to  increase  its  strength  and  power. 
The  more  general  diffusion  of  education,  the  increased 
facilities  of  personal  intercourse,  the  rapidity  with  which 
ideas  and  intelligence  may  be  transmitted,  and  a  more  gen 
eral  agreement  among  mankind  as  to  the  standard  by  which 
man  and  all  of  his  acts  ought  to  be  tried,  have  made  this 
power  formidable  beyond  all  former  precedent  in  the  world's 
history.  Its  jurisdiction  seems  to  be  universal,  circum 
scribed  by  no  limits,  bounded  by  no  recognised  land  marks; 
it  invades  the  sanctuaries  of  the  Most  High  and  questions 
his  oracles  —  enters  the  palaces  of  kings  and  rulers,  and  the 
homes  of  the  people,  and  summons  all  to  answer  at  its  bar. 
Being  but  the  judgment  of  fallible  man,  it  can  claim  no 
exemption  from  his  errors,  his  frailties,  his  ignorance,  or 
passions,  yet  being  mischievous  even  in  its  errors,  it  is  not 
wise  or  safe  to  disregard  it. 

"Before  this  tribunal  our  social  and  political  system  is 
arraigned,  and  we  are  summoned  to  answer.  It  is  my  pur 
pose,  today,  to  respond  to  the  summons.  I  consider  the 
occasion  not  inappropriate.  The  investigative  discussion 
and  decision  of  social  questions  are  no  longer  confined  to 
legislative  halls  and  political  assemblies  of  the  people.  The 
secluded  halls  of  science  already  resound  with  the  notes  of 
controversy  on  the  subject.  .  .  . 

"  For  nearly  twenty  years  our  domestic  enemies  have  strug 
gled  by  pen  and  speech  to  excite  discontent  among  the  white 
race,  and  insurrection  among  the  black;  their  efforts  have 
shaken  the  national  government  to  its  deep  foundation, 
and  bursted  the  bonds  of  Christian  unity  in  our  land.  Yet 

*  Robert  Toombs,  An  Oration  delivered  before  the  Few  and  Phi  Gamma 
Societies  of  Emory  College:  Slavery  in  the  United  States;  its  consistency  with 
republican  institutions,  and  its  effects  upon  the  slave  and  society.  Augusta, 
Ga.,  1853.  The  only  copy  found  by  the  writer  is  in  the  Boston  Public 
Library. 


THE    SLAVEHOLDING    REGIME  157 

the  objects  of  their  attacks  —  the  slaveholding  states  — 
reposing  in  the  confidence  of  their  strength,  have  scarcely 
felt  the  shock.  In  glancing  over  the  civilized  world,  the  eye 
rests  upon  not  a  single  spot  where  all  classes  of  society  are 
so  well  content  with  their  social  system,  or  have  greater 
reason  to  be  so,  than  in  the  slaveholding  states  of  the  Ameri 
can  Union.  Stability,  progress,  order,  peace,  content  and 
prosperity  reign  throughout  our  borders.  Not  a  single 
soldier  is  to  be  found  in  our  widely  extended  domain  to 
overawe  or  protect  society.  The  desire  for  organic  >  change 
nowhere  manifests  itself.  These  great  social  and  political 
blessings  are  not  the  results  of  accident,  but  the  results  of  a 
wise,  just  and  humane  republican  system.  It  is  my  purpose 
to  vindicate  the  wisdom,  humanity,  and  justice  of  this  system, 
to  show  that  the  position  of  the  African  race  in  it  is  consist 
ent  with  its  principles,  advantageous  to  that  race  and  society. 
"African  slavery  existed  in  all  the  colonies  at  the  com 
mencement  of  the  Revolution.  The  paramount  authority 
of  the  crown,  with  or  without  the  consent  of  the  colonies, 
had  introduced  and  legalised  it;  it  was  inextricably  inter 
woven  with  the  very  framework  of  society,  especially  in  the 
Southern  States.  The  question  was  not  presented  to  us 
whether  it  was  just  or  beneficial  to  the  African  or  advanta 
geous  to  us  to  tear  him  away  by  force  or  fraud  from  bondage 
in  his  own  country  and  place  him  in  a  like  condition  in  ours. 
England  and  the  Christian  world  had  long  since  settled  that 
question  for  us.  At  the  final  overthrow  of  British  authority 
in  these  states  our  ancestors  found  seven  hundred  thousand 
of  the  African  race  among  them  in  bondage,  concentrated 
from  the  nature  of  our  climate  and  production  chiefly  in  the 
present  slaveholding  states.  It  became  their  duty  to 
establish  governments  over  the  country  from  which  their 
valour  had  driven  out  British  authority.  They  entered 
upon  this  great  work,  profoundly  impressed  with  the  truth 
that  that  government  was  best  which  secured  the  greatest 
happiness  possible  to  the  whole  society,  and  adopted  consti 
tutional  republics  as  the  best  mode  to  secure  that  great  end 
of  human  society.  They  incorporated  no  Utopian  theories 
in  their  system.  Starting  from  the  point  that  each  state 
was  sovereign  and  embodied  the  collective  will  and  power 
of  its  whole  people,  they  affirmed  its  right  and  duty  to  define 
and  fix  as  well  as  protect  and  defend  the  rights  of  each 


158  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

individual  member  of  the  state  and  to  hold  all  individual 
rights  as  subordinate  to  the  great  interests  of  the  whole 
society.  This  last  proposition  is  the  corner  stone  of  repub 
lican  government,  which  must  be  stricken  out  before  the 
legal  status  of  the  African  race  among  us  can  be  shown  to  be 
inconsistent  with  its  principles.  The  question  with  the 
builders  up  of  our  system  of  government  was  not  what  rights 
man  might  have  in  a  state  of  nature,  but  what  rights  he 
ought  to  have  in  a  state  of  society.  .  .  . 

"The  slaveholders,  acting  upon  these  principles,  finding 
the  Africans  already  among  them  in  slavery,  unfit  to  be 
intrusted  with  political  power,  and  incapable  as  freemen  of 
either  securing  their  own  happiness  or  promoting  the  public 
prosperity,  recognised  their  condition  as  slaves  and  sub 
jected  it  to  legal  control.  The  justice  and  policy  of  this 
decision  have  both  been  greatly  questioned,  and  both  must 
depend  upon  the  soundness  of  the  assumptions  upon  which 
it  was  based.  I  hold  that  they  were  sound  and  true,  and 
that  the  African  is  unfit  to  be  intrusted  with  political  power 
and  incapable  as  a  freeman  of  securing  his  own  happiness 
or  contributing  to  the  public  prosperity,  and  that  whenever 
the  two  races  co-exist  a  state  of  slavery  is  best  for  him  and 
for  society.  And  under  it  in  our  country  he  is  in  a  better 
condition  than  any  he  has  ever  attained  in  any  other  age  and 
country,  either  in  bondage  or  freedom.  .  .  . 

"Very  soon  after  the  discovery  and  settlement  of  America, 
the  policy  of  the  Christian  world  bought  large  numbers  of 
their  people  of  their  savage  masters  and  countrymen,  and 
imported  them  into  the  Western  World.  Here  we  are 
enabled  to  view  them  under  different  and  far  more  favorable 
conditions.  In  Hayti,  by  the  encouragement  of  the  French 
government,  after  a  long  probation  of  slavery,  they  became 
free;  and,  led  on  by  the  valour  and  conduct  of  the  mixed 
breeds,  aided  by  overpowering  numbers,  they  massacred  the 
small  number  of  whites  who  inhabited  the  island,  and  suc 
ceeded  to  the  undisputed  sway  of  the  finest  island  in  the 
West  Indies  under  the  highest  state  of  cultivation.  Their 
condition  in  Hayti  left  nothing  to  be  desired  for  the  most 
favorable  experiment  of  the  capacity  of  the  race  for  self- 
government  and  civilization.  This  experiment  has  now 
been  tested  for  sixty  years,  and  its  results  are  before  the 
world.  A  war  of  races  began  the  moment  the  fear  of  foreign 


THE    SLAVEHOLDING    REGIME  159 

invasion  ceased,  and  resulted  in  the  extermination  of  the 
greater  number  of  the  mulattoes  who  had  rescued  them  from 
the  dominion  of  the  whites.  Revolutions,  tumults  and 
disorders  have  been  the  ordinary  pastimes  of  the  emanci 
pated  blacks;  production  has  almost  ceased,  and  their 
stock  of  civilization  acquired  in  slavery  has  become  already 
exhausted,  and  they  are  now  scarcely  distinguishable  from 
the  tribes  from  which  they  were  torn  in  their  native  land. 
"More  recently  the  same  experiment  has  been  tried  in 
Jamaica  under  the  auspices  of  England.  .  .  .  The  island  of 
Jamaica  was  one  of  the  most  beautiful,  productive,  and 
prosperous  of  the  British  colonial  possessions.  England, 
deceived  by  the  theories  of  her  speculative  philanthropists 
into  the  opinion  that  free  blacks  would  be  more  productive 
laborers  than  slaves,  in  1838  proclaimed  total  emancipation 
of  the  black  race  in  Jamaica.  Her  arms  and  her  power  have 
watched  over  and  protected  them;  not  only  the  interest  but 
the  absolute  necessities  of  the  white  proprietors  of  the  land 
compelled  them  to  offer  every  inducement  and  stimulant 
to  industry,  yet  the  experiment  stands  before  the  world  a 
confessed  failure.  Ruin  has  overwhelmed  the  proprietors; 
and  the  negro,  true  to  his  nationality,  buries  himself  in  filth, 
and  sloth,  and  crime.  In  the  United  States,  too,  we  have 
peculiar  opportunities  for  studying  the  African  race  under 
different  conditions.  Here  we  find  him  in  slavery;  here  we 
find  him  also  a  freeman  in  the  slaveholding  and  in  the  non- 
slaveholding  states.  The  best  specimens  of  the  free  blacks 
to  be  found  are  in  the  Southern  States,  in  the  closest  contact 
with  slavery  and  subject  to  many  of  its  restraints.  Upon 
the  theory  of  the  abolitionists  the  most  favorable  condition 
in  which  you  can  view  the  free  negro  is  in  the  non-slave- 
holding  states  of  the  Union;  there  we  ought  to  expect  to 
find  him  displaying  all  the  capability  of  his  race  for  improve 
ment,  in  a  temperate  climate,  among  an  active,  industrious, 
and  ingenious  people,  surrounded  by  sympathising  friends 
and  mild  and  just  and  equal  institutions.  If  he  fails  here, 
surely  it  can  be  chargeable  to  nothing  but  himself.  He  has 
had  seventy  years  to  cleanse  himself  and  his  race  from  the 
leprosy  of  slavery,  yet  what  is  his  condition  to-day?  He  is 
lord  of  himself,  but  he  finds  it  'a  heritage  of  woe.'  After 
seventy  years  of  probation  among  themselves,  the  Northern 
states,  acting  upon  the  same  principles  of  self-protection 


160  THE    LIFL  'OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

which  has  marked  our  policy,  declare  him  unfit  to  enjoy 
the  rights  and  perform  the  duties  of  citizenship.  Denied 
social  equality  by  an  irreversible  law  of  nature,  and  political 
rights  by  municipal  law,  incapable  of  maintaining  an  unequal 
struggle  with  a  superior  race,  the  melancholy  history  of  his 
career  of  freedom  is  here  most  usually  found  recorded  in 
criminal  courts,  jails,  poor-houses,  and  penitentiaries.  The 
authentic  statistics  of  crime  and  poverty  show  an  amount 
of  misery  and  crime  among  the  free  blacks  out  of  all  propor 
tion  to  their  numbers  when  compared  to  any  class  of  the 
white  race.  This  fact  has  had  itself  recognised  in  the  most 
decisive  manner  throughout  the  Northern  states.  No  town, 
or  city,  or  state,  encourages  their  immigration;  many  of 
them  discourage  it  by  political  legislation;  and  some  of  the 
non-slaveholding  states  have  absolutely  prohibited  their 
entry  into  their  borders,  under  any  circumstances  whatever. 
If  the  Northern  states  which  adopt  this  policy  deny  the  truth 
of  the  principles  upon  which  our  policy  is  built  and  main 
tained,  they  are  guilty  of  a  most  cruel  injury  to  an  unhappy 
race.  They  do  admit  it,  and  expel  them  from  their  borders 
and  drive  them  out  as  wanderers  and  outcasts.  The  result 
of  this  policy  is  everywhere  apparent.  The  statistics  of 
population  supply  the  evidence  of  their  condition.  In  the 
non-slaveholding  states  their  annual  increase  during  the 
last  ten  years  has  been  but  little  over  one  per  cent.,  even  with 
the  additions  of  fugitives  from  labor  and  emancipated  slaves 
from  the  South,  clearly  showing  that  in  this  their  most 
favored  condition  when  left  to  themselves  they  are  barely 
capable  of  maintaining  their  existence,  and  with  the  prospect 
of  a  denser  population  and  greater  competition  in  labor  for 
employment  consequent  thereon  they  are  in  danger  of  be 
coming  extinct.  The  Southern  States,  acting  upon  the  same 
admitted  fact,  keep  them  in  the  condition  in  which  we  found 
them,  protect  them  against  themselves  and  compel  them  to 
contribute  to  their  own  and  the  public  interest  and  welfare. 
That  our  system  does  promote  the  well-being  of  the  African 
race  subject  to  it  and  the  public  interest  I  shall  now  proceed 
to  show  by  facts  which  are  open  to  all  men  and  can  be 
neither  controverted  or  denied.  .  .  . 

"Our  political  system  gives  the  slave  great  and  valuable 
rights.  His  life  is  equally  protected  with  that  of  his  master, 
his  person  is  secure  from  assault  against  all  others  except 


THE    SLAVEHOLDINC    REGIME  161 

his  master,  and  his  power  in  this  respect  is  placed  under 
salutary  restraints.  He  is  entitled  by  law  to  ample  food  and 
clothing  and  exempted  from  excessive  labor,  and  when  no 
longer  capable  of  labor,  in  old  age  or  disease,  his  comfortable 
maintenance  is  a  legal  charge  upon  his  master.  We  know 
that  these  rights  are,  in  the  main,  faithfully  secured  to  him. 
.  .  .  But  these  legal  rights  of  the  slave  embrace  but  a 
small  portion  of  the  privileges  actually  enjoyed  by  him. 
The  nature  of  the  relation  of  master  and  slave  begets  kind 
nesses,  imposes  duties  (and  secures  their  performance), 
which  exist  in  no  other  relation  of  capital  and  labor.  In 
terest  and  humanity  cooperate  in  harmony  for  the  well-being 
of  our  laborers.  A  striking  evidence  of  this  fact  is  found  in 
our  religious  statistics.  While  religious  instruction  is  not 
enjoined  by  law  in  all  the  states,  the  number  of  slaves  who 
are  in  communion  with  the  different  churches  abundantly 
proves  the  universality  of  their  enjoyment  of  religious 
privileges.  And  a  learned  clergyman  in  New  York  has 
recently  shown  from  the  records  of  our  evangelical  churches 
that  a  greater  number  of  African  slaves  in  the  United  States 
have  enjoyed  and  are  enjoying  the  consolations  of  religion 
than  the  combined  efforts  of  all  the  Christian  churches  have 
been  able  to  redeem  from  the  heathen  world  since  the  intro 
duction  of  slavery  among  us.  ... 

"It  is  objected  that  our  slaves  are  debarred  educational 
advantages.  The  objection  is  well  taken,  but  is  without 
great  force;  their  station  in  society  makes  education  neither 
necessary  nor  useful.  .  .  . 

"We  are  reproached  that  the  marriage  relation  is  neither 
recognised  nor  protected  by  law.  This  reproach  is  not 
wholly  unjust,  this  is  an  evil  not  yet  remedied  by  law,  but 
marriage  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  institution  of  slavery 
as  it  exists  among  us,  and  the  objection  therefore  lies  rather 
to  an  incident  than  to  the  essence  of  the  system.  But  even 
in  this  we  have  deprived  the  slave  of  no  pre-existing  right. 
We  found  the  race  without  any  knowledge  of  or  regard  for 
the  institution  of  marriage,  and  we  are  reproached  for  not 
having  as  yet  secured  that  and  all  other  blessings  of  civiliza 
tion.  The  separation  of  families  is  much  relied  on  by  the 
abolitionsts  in  Europe  and  America.  Some  of  the  slave- 
holding  states  have  already  made  partial  provision  against 
this  evil,  and  all  of  them  may  do  so;  but  the  objection  is 


162  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

far  more  formidable  in  theory  than  practice,  even  without 
legislative  interposition. 

"The  tendency  of  slave  labor  is  to  aggregation  —  of  free 
labor  to  dispersion.  The  accidents  of  life,  the  desire  to 
better  one's  condition,  and  the  pressure  of  want  (the  proud 
man's  contumely  and  oppressor's  wrong)  produce  infinitely 
a  greater  amount  of  separation  in  families  of  the  white 
races  than  that  which  ever  happened  to  the  slave.  This 
is  true  everywhere,  even  in  the  United  States  where  the 
general  condition  of  the  people  is  prosperous.  But  it  is 
still  more  marked  in  Europe.  The  injustice  and  despotism 
of  England  to  Ireland  has  produced  more  separation  of 
Irish  families  and  sundered  more  domestic  ties  within  the 
last  ten  years  than  slavery  has  effected  since  its  introduction 
into  the  United  States.  The  twenty  millions  of  freemen  in 
the  United  States  are  living  witnesses  to  the  dispersive 
injustice  of  the  old  world.  And  today  England  is  purchas 
ing  coolies  in  India  and  apprentices  in  Africa  to  redeem 
her  West  India  possessions  from  the  folly  of  emancipation. 
What  securities  has  she  thrown  around  the  family  altars  of 
these  miserable  savages?  It  is  in  vain  to  call  this  separa 
tion  voluntary  —  if  it  were  true  that  fact  mitigates  none 
of  its  evils.  But  it  is  the  result  of  a  necessity  as  stern, 
inexorable  and  irresistible,  as  the  physical  force  which  brings 
the  slave  from  Virginia  to  Georgia. 

"  But  the  monster  objection  to  our  institution  of  slavery  in 
the  estimation  of  its  opponents  is  that  wages  are  withheld 
from  labor  —  the  force  of  the  objection  is  lost  in  its  want 
of  truth.  An  examination  of  the  true  theory  of  wages  will 
expose  its  fallacy.  Under  the  system  of  free  labor  wages 
are  paid  in  money,  the  representative  of  products,  in  ours 
in  products  themselves.  If  we  pay,  in  the  comforts  of  life, 
more  than  the  free  laborer's  pecuniary  wages  will  buy,  then 
our  laborer  is  paid  higher  wages  than  the  free  laborer.  The 
Parliamentary  Reports  in  England  show  that  the  wages  of 
agricultural  and  unskilled  labor  in  Great  Britain  not  only 
fail  to  furnish  the  laborer  with  the  comforts  of  the  slave, 
but  even  with  the  necessaries  of  life,  and  no  slaveholder  in 
Georgia  could  escape  a  conviction  for  cruelty  to  his  slaves 
who  exacted  from  them  the  same  amount  of  labor,  for  the 
same  compensation  in  the  necessaries  of  life,  which  noble 
men  and  gentlemen  of  England  pay  their  free  laborers. 


THE    SLAVEHOLDING    REGIME  163 

Under  their  system  man  has  become  less  valuable  and  less 
cared  for  than  their  domestic  animals;  and  noble  Dukes 
will  depopulate  whole  districts  of  men  to  supply  their  places 
with  sheep,  and  then  with  intrepid  audacity  lecture  and 
denounce  American  slaveholders. 

"The  great  conflict  between  labor  and  capital  under  free 
competition  has  ever  been  how  the  earnings  of  labor  shall 
be  divided  between  it  and  capital.  In  new  and  sparsely 
settled  countries  where  land  is  cheap  and  food  is  easily  pro 
duced  and  education  and  intelligence  approximate  equality, 
labor  can  struggle  successfully  in  this  warfare  with  capital. 
But  this  is  an  exceptional  and  temporary  condition  of 
society.  In  the  old  world  this  state  of  things  has  long  since 
passed  away  and  the  conflict  with  the  lower  grades  of  labor 
has  long  since  ceased.  There  the  compensation  of  unskilled 
labor,  which  first  succumbs  to  capital,  is  reduced  to  a  point 
scarcely  adequate  to  the  continuance  of  the  race.  .  .  .  Here 
the  portion  due  the  slave  is  a  charge  upon  the  whole  product 
of  capital  and  upon  the  capital  itself.  It  is  neither  depend 
ant  upon  seasons  nor  subject  to  accidents,  and  survives  his 
own  capacity  for  labor  and  even  the  ruin  of  his  master. 
The  general  happiness,  cheerfulness,  and  contentment  of  the 
slaves  compare  favorably  with  that  of  laborers  in  any  other 
age  or  country.  They  require  no  standing  armies  to  enforce 
their  obedience,  while  the  evidences  of  discontent  and  the 
appliance  of  force  to  repress  it  are  everywhere  visible  among 
the  toiling  millions  of  the  earth.  Even  in  the  Northern 
states  of  this  Union  strikes  and  mobs  and  labor  unions  and 
combinations  against  employers  attest  at  once  the  misery 
and  discontent  of  labor  among  them.  .  .  . 

"That  the  condition  of  the  slave  offers  great  opportunities 
for  abuse  is  true,  that  these  opportunities  are  frequently 
used  to  violate  justice  and  humanity,  is  also  true.  But 
our  laws  restrain  these  abuses  and  punish  these  crimes 
in  this  as  well  as  in  all  the  other  relations  of  life.  They 
who  assume  it  as  a  fundamental  principle  in  the  constitu 
tion  of  man  that  abuse  is  the  unvarying  concomitant  of 
power  and  crime  of  opportunity,  subvert  the  foundations 
of  all  private  morals  and  of  every  social  system.  Nowhere 
does  this  principle  find  a  nobler  refutation  than  in  the  treat 
ment  of  the  African  race  by  Southern  slaveholders.  And 
we  may  with  hope  and  confidence  safely  leave  to  them  the 


164  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

removal  of  the  existing  abuses  under  which  it  now  labors 
and  such  further  ameliorations  of  its  condition  as  may  be 
demanded  by  justice  and  humanity.  His  condition  is  not 
permanent  among  us,  and  we  may  find  his  exodus  in  the 
unvarying  laws  of  population.  Under  the  conditions  of 
labor  in  England  and  the  continent  of  Europe  slavery  could 
not  exist  here  or  anywhere  else.  The  moment  wages 
descend  to  a  point  barely  sufficient  to  support  the  laborer 
and  his  family  capital  cannot  afford  to  own  labor,  and  slavery 
instantly  ceases.  Slavery  ceased  in  England  in  obedience 
to  this  law,  and  not  from  any  regard  to  liberty  or  humanity. 
The  increase  of  population  will  produce  the  same  result 
in  this  country,  and  American  slavery,  like  that  of  England, 
will  find  its  euthanasy  in  the  general  prostration  of  all  labor. 

"The  next  aspect  in  which  I  propose  to  view  this  question 
is  its  effects  upon  the  interests  of  the  slaveholding  states 
themselves.  The  great  argument  by  which  slavery  was 
formerly  assailed  was  that  it  was  a  dear,  unprofitable  and 
unproductive  labor;  it  was  held  that  the  slave  himself  would 
be  a  more  productive  member  of  society  as  a  freeman  than 
in  bondage.  The  results  of  emancipation  in  the  British 
and  French  West  India  Islands  have  not  only  disproven  but 
annihilated  this  theory.  .  .  . 

"Here  the  labor  of  the  country  is  united  with  and  pro 
tected  by  its  capital,  directed  by  the  educated  and  intelligent, 
secured  against  its  own  weakness,  waste  and  folly,  asso 
ciated  in  such  form  as  to  give  the  greatest  efficiency  in 
production  and  the  least  cost  of  maintenance.  Each  indi 
vidual  laborer  of  the  North  is  the  victim  not  only  of  his 
folly  and  extravagance  but  of  his  ignorance,  misfortunes 
and  necessities.  His  isolation  enlarges  his  expenses  without 
increasing  his  comforts,  his  want  of  capital  increases  the 
price  of  everything  he  buys,  disables  him  from  supplying 
his  wants  at  favorable  times  or  on  advantageous  terms 
and  throws  him  in  the  hands  of  retailers  and  extortioners. 
But  labor  united  with  capital,  directed  by  skill,  forecast 
and  intelligence,  while  it  is  capable  of  its  highest  production, 
is  freed  from  these  evils,  leaves  a  margin  both  for  increased 
comforts  to  the  laborer  and  additional  profits  to  capital. 
This  is  the  explanation  of  the  seeming  paradox. 

"The  opponents  of  slavery,  true  to  their  monomania  that 
it  is  the  sum  of  all  evils  and  crimes,  in  spite  of  all  history, 


THE    SLAVEHOLDING    REGIME  165 

sacred  and  profane,  ancient  or  modern,  all  facts  and  all 
truth,  insist  that  its  effect  on  the  commonwealth  is  to  ener 
vate  it,  demoralise  it,  and  render  it  incapable  of  advance 
ment  and  a  high  civilization,  and  upon  the  citizen  to  debase 
him  morally,  physically  and  intellectually.  Such  is  neither 
the  truth  of  history,  sacred  or  profane,  nor  the  experience  of 
our  own  past  or  present.  .  .  .  Such  is  our  social  system  and 
such  our  condition  under  it.  Its  political  wisdom  is  vindi 
cated  by  its  effects  on  society,  its  morality  by  the  practices 
of  the  Patriarchs  and  the  teachings  of  the  Apostles;  we 
submit  it  to  the  judgment  of  the  civilized  world  with  the 
firm  conviction  that  the  adoption  of  no  other  system  under 
our  circumstances  would  have  exhibited  the  individual  man 
(bond  or  free)  in  a  high  development,  or  society  in  a  happier 
civilization." 

In  his  Tremont  Temple  address  Toombs  inserted  an 
argument  which  was  too  obvious  in  the  minds  of  Georgians 
to  require  mention  by  him  at  home  but  which  in  spite  of  its 
truth  and  vital  importance  was  never  given  attention  by 
the  foes  of  the  existing  Southern  regime.  He  said:  "The 
question  is  not  whether  we  could  not  be  more  prosperous 
and  happy  with  these  three  and  a  half  million  slaves  in 
Africa,  and  their  places  filled  with  an  equal  number  of 
hardy,  intelligent  and  enterprising  citizens  of  the  superior 
race;  but  it  is  simply  whether,  while  we  have  them  among 
us,  we  would  be  most  prosperous  with  them  in  freedom  or 
in  bondage." 

There  were  fallacies  in  both  of  these  addresses,  but  they 
were  fallacies  almost  universally  upheld  by  the  Southern 
community,  and  they  were  less  vital  and  dangerous  falla 
cies  than  those  committed  by  Helper  and  the  abolitionist 
school  on  the  one  hand  and  those  of  the  advocates  of  reopen 
ing  the  African  slave-trade  on  the  other.  Toombs  considered 
that  the  importation  of  an  additional  mass  of  crude  Africans 
would  merely  increase  the  disadvantages  under  which  the 
South  was  laboring;  but  as  regards  the  negro  mass  already 
on  hand,  impossible  to  remove  by  any  available  means, 


166  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

he  held  that  a  liberalized  type  of  slavery  was  the  best  means 
of  adjusting  them  to  the  community  of  the  whites;  and  he 
necessarily  held  that  the  reform  of  the  Southern  black  codes 
ought  to  be  left  for  accomplishment  by  the  voluntary  action 
of  the  Southern  states  after  sufficiently  quiet  times  should 
have  been  restored  for  constructive  work  to  be  undertaken. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  ELECTION  OF  1860 

WHEN  the  Constitutional  Union  party  of  1850  in 
Georgia  failed  to  secure  national  recognition,  its 
component  parts  fell  back,  as  we  have  seen  in  an  earlier 
chapter,  into  their  former  Whig  and  Democratic  alignments. 
The  Whigs  as  well  as  the  Democrats  found  some  difficulty 
in  their  work  of  reorganization.  To  heal  the  schism  among 
the  Georgia  Whigs  and  hearten  them  for  the  attempt  to 
restore  the  strength  of  their  party,  a  master  hand  was  needed. 
Toombs  furnished  this.  In  the  state  convention  of  the  party 
at  Milledgeville,  June  21,  1853,  he  took  full  control.  In  a 
key-note  speech  he  denounced  Pierce  for  appointing  Free- 
soilers  to  office,  proclaimed  anew  his  own  devotion  to  the 
resistance  plank  in  the  Georgia  Platform,  and  deprecated 
all  fear  of  protective  tariffs  and  national  banking  in  case 
the  Whig  party  at  large  should  regain  control.*  He  then 
caused  the  convention  to  nominate  for  the  governorship 
Charles  J.  Jenkins,  who  was  doubtless  the  strongest  candidate 
available.  Toombs  then  canvassed  the  state  in  Jenkins's 
behalf,  and  for  a  while  seemed  likely  to  carry  it.  Jenkins, 
however,  committed  a  blunder  by  calling  himself  a  Unionist 
rather  than  a  Whig,  and  was  defeated  by  Herschel  V.  John 
son,  the  Democratic  nominee,  by  about  500  majority. 

The  hope  of  a  country-wide  rehabilitation  of  the  Whig 
party  was  soon  blasted,  for  when  the  Northern  Whigs  in 
Congress  unanimously  opposed  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill, 
the  party  became  wrecked  beyond  the  hope  of  repair.  The 

*  Federal  Union,  June  14,  21  and  28,  1853. 


1 68  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

more  pronounced  of  the  anti-slavery  Whigs  soon  joined  the 
incipient  Republican  party;  and  the  remaining  Whigs  con 
fronted  the  three  alternatives  of  entering  the  secret  lodges 
of  the  anti-Catholic  and  anti-immigrant  Know-nothing 
("American")  party,  or  joining  the  Democrats,  or  con 
tinuing  as  a  forlorn  Whig  remnant.  Toombs  and  Stephens 
promptly  rejected  the  first  of  these  three,  but  were  for  a 
while  in  a  dilemma  between  the  last  two.  The  situation 
and  prospect  at  the  end  of  1854  were  described  by  Howell 
Cobb  in  a  letter  to  James  Buchanan,  December  5,  1854: 

"As  you  have  seen,  the  Democratic  party  has  been  literally 
slaughtered  in  the  Northern,  Middle  and  Western  states, 
whilst  of  the  Whig  party  there  is  not  left  even  a  monumental 
remembrance.  ...  I  cannot  but  feel  that  1856  will  see 
an  overwhelming  reaction  in  the  public  mind.  Whether 
it  should  be  so  or  not  depends  in  a  great  measure  upon  the 
course  of  policy  of  the  Democratic  party.  At  present  it 
would  seem  that  the  presidential  contest  of  1856  will  be 
between  the  National  Democratic  party  on  the  one  hand, 
and  on  the  other  two  sectional  parties,  a  Northern  one 
headed  probably  by  Seward  and  a  Southern  one  possibly 
by  Toombs.  This  will  certainly  be  the  fight  unless  the 
Whigs  should  become  partly  nationalized  through  the  instru 
mentality  of  the  *  Know-nothings/  of  which  there  is  some 
chance." 

While  Cobb's  description  was  correct  his  prophecy  was 
fallacious.  In  May  and  June,  1855,  Stephens  and  Toombs 
issued  public  letters  in  response  to  inquiries,  denouncing 
Know-no thingism;  *  and  while  Stephens  for  a  season  declared 
his  independence  of  all  party  affiliations,  Toombs  concluded 
his  anti-Know-nothing  letter  as  follows: 

"The  true  policy  of  the  South  is  to  unite;  to  lay  aside 
all  party  division.  Whigs,  Democrats  and  Know-nothings 
should  come  together  and  combine  for  the  common  safety. 
If  we  are  wise  enough  to  do  this,  to  present  one  unbroken 
column  of  fifteen  states  for  the  preservation  of  their  own 

*  Federal  Union,  May  22  and  June  19,  1855. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  169 

rights,  the  Constitution  and  the  Union,  and  to  uphold  and 
support  that  noble  band  of  patriots  in  the  North  who  have 
stood  for  the  Constitution  and  the  right  against  the  tempest 
of  fanaticism,  folly  and  treason  which  has  assailed  them, 
we  shall  succeed.  We  shall  then  have  conquered  a  peace 
which  will  be  enduring,  and  by  means  which  will  not  invite 
further  aggression." 

Since  nearly  all  the  remaining  Northern  friends  of  Southern 
policy  were  Democrats,  this  letter  indicated  that  Toombs 
was  drifting  toward  the  Democratic  alignment.  The 
letter  was  written  on  the  eve  of  his  departure  from  America 
on  a  brief  tour  with  his  family  in  England  and  Europe. 
Upon  his  return  in  the  fall  he  hastened  back  to  Georgia  to 
support  the  Democratic  nominees  for  the  governorship  and 
the  legislature;  and  thereafter  he,  and  Stephens  likewise, 
were  permanent  members  of  the  Democratic  party.  These 
two  "inseparables"  together  with  Howell  Cobb  were  the 
principal  figures  in  a  "Democratic  and  anti-Know-nothing 
massmeeting"  at  Milledgeville  during  the  session  of  the 
legislature,  November  8,  1855,  at  which  the  policy  of  the 
Georgia  Democracy  was  determined  for  the  presidential 
campaign  of  1856.  After  endorsing  the  fourth  resolution 
of  the  Georgia  Platform,  it  resolved  that  delegates  should 
be  sent  to  the  Cincinnati  convention  under  instructions  to 
affiliate  with  no  delegates  who  should  not  approve  the 
recognition  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  act,  and  to  oppose  any 
anti-slavery  restriction  whatever  in  the  territories.  The 
state  Democratic  convention  which  met  on  January  15  did 
little  but  ratify  the  actions  of  that  massmeeting  and  appoint 
delegates  to  Cincinnati.* 

Toombs,  having  as  usual  no  favors  to  ask  and  having  little 
preference  as  between  the  Democratic  aspirants,  took  no 
part  in  the  nomination.  But  in  the  popular  campaign  in 
the  summer  and  fall  of  1856  he  was  far  from  passive.  He 

*  Federal  Union,  Nov.  13,  1855,  and  Jan.  22,  1856. 


170  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

wrote  on  July  8  to  a  Virginia  friend:  "The  election  of  Fre 
mont  would  be  the  end  of  the  Union,  and  ought  to  be.  The 
object  of  Fremont's  friends  is  the  conquest  of  the  South. 
I  am  content  that  they  shall  own  us  when  they  conquer  us, 
but  not  before."  *  And  he  expressed  himself  similarly  on 
the  stump,  f  The  surest  means  of  defeating  Fremont,  so 
far  as  the  Southern  vote  was  concerned,  was  to  prevent 
Fillmore,  the  Know-nothing  candidate,  from  carrying  South 
ern  states.  Toombs  accordingly  campaigned  in  Georgia 
against  the  Fillmore  ticket  and  was  largely  instrumental  in 
procuring  for  Buchanan  the  heavy  majority  of  14,00x3  votes 
in  the  state. 

When  the  new  administration  assumed  office  Toombs 
declined  a  diplomatic  mission,  deeming  that  his  services 
were  more  needed  at  home  than  abroad.  For  a  time  he 
was  concerned  in  persuading  Buchanan  to  take  steps  for 
acquiring  Cuba;  but  the  wranglings  which  Robert  J.  Walker 
precipitated  as  governor  of  Kansas  soon  diverted  all  atten 
tion  to  that  territory  again,  and  brought  the  beginning  of 
the  final  rift  in  the  Democratic  party.  Douglas  endorsed 
Walker  as  a  promoter  of  squatter  sovereignty  pure  and 
simple.  Toombs,  Stephens,  Davis  and  others  of  the  South 
denounced  Walker  and  proclaimed  the  doctrine  of  non 
intervention  as  against  that  of  squatter  sovereignty.  That 
is  to  say,  they  contended  that  neither  Congress  nor  the 
inhabitants  had  a  right  to  exclude  slave"  property  so  long  as 
the  territorial  status  should  continue,  though  upon  the  erec 
tion  of  the  territory  into  a  state  the  inhabitants  could  of 
course  prescribe  institutions  at  will  through  their  consti 
tutional  convention.  Buchanan,  after  a  period  of  hesitation, 
took  the  side  of  the  Southerners;  but  Democratic  harmony 
had  fled,  and  with  it  the  prospect  of  constructive  policy. 

*  Rhodes,  History  of  the  United  States,  II,  204,  205,  quoting  from  the 
New  York  Tribune,  Aug.  13,  1856. 
t  Stovall,  Toombs,  p.  151. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  171 

In  state  politics  the  year  1857  marked  the  rise  into  con 
spicuous  position  of  two  fresh  leaders,  Benjamin  H.  Hill 
and  Joseph  E.  Brown,  rival  candidates  for  the  governorship. 
Hill,  a  brilliant  and  vehement  orator,  was  prominent  partly 
because  of  the  dearth  of  other  talented  men  among  the 
Georgia  Know-nothings.  Brown,  a  plain,  sober,  shrewd 
and  vigorous  man  of  affairs,  on  the  other  hand  owed  his 
nomination  to  the  fact  that  in  the  Democratic  convention 
there  were  so  many  strong  candidates  for  the  nomination, 
not  including  Brown,  that  a  deadlock  arose  which  could 
be  broken  only  by  the  bringing  in  of  a  "dark  horse."  Since 
his  brief  term  in  the  Georgia  senate,  which  we  have  already 
noticed,  he  had  managed  his  small  farm  and  practised  law 
in  rugged  northern  Georgia,  and  then  served  as  a  judge  on 
the  northern  circuit.  He  was  easily  elected  governor  in  1857, 
and  promptly  began  to  display  such  administrative  talent 
and  to  show  himself  so  thoroughly  representative  of  the 
character  and  views  of  the  sturdy  yeomanry  of  the  state 
that  the  custom  of  gubernational  rotation  was  abandoned 
and  he  was  kept  in  the  office  steadily  through  the  remaining 
ante-bellum  years  and  the  whole  period  of  the  war.  Upon 
the  Federal  and  Confederate  relations  of  the  state  his  posi 
tion  was  throughout  his  administration,  as  we  shall  see, 
virtually  identical  with  that  of  Toombs.  At  the  time  of 
Brown's  nomination  Toombs  was  away  on  a  horseback  trip 
in  Texas  to  inspect  a  ninety-thousand-acre  tract  which  he 
had  bought  near  Fort  Worth  and  to  negotiate  with  the 
squatters  thereon.  "Who  the  devil  is  Joe  Brown?"  he  is 
reported  to  have  said  upon  hearing  of  the  nomination. 
Hastening  back  to  Georgia,  he  was  glad  to  learn  that  Brown's 
talents  and  opinions  were  eminently  satisfactory.  Toombs 
lent  a  hand  vigorously  in  the  campaign,  and  was  himself 
elected  by  the  legislature  in  November,  by  a  great  majority, 
for  a  second  term  in  the  Senate. 

Events  now  diverted  public  attention  wholly  from  state 


172  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

to  national  politics.  The  assertion  of  the  Supreme  Court 
in  the  Dred  Scott  case,  delivered  in  March,  1857,  that 
slavery  could  not  be  prohibited  in  any  territory  by  any 
constitutional  means  whatever,  was  taken  at  the  South  as 
a  vindication  of  the  policy  of  aggressive  defense;  but  at 
the  North  it  was  coldly  disapproved  by  a  great  number  of 
Democrats  and  hotly  denounced  by  the  Republicans.  In 
1858  the  debates  in  Congress  over  the  Lecompton  constitu 
tion  for  Kansas  and  over  the  proposed  acquisition  of  Cuba, 
together  with  the  Lincoln-Douglas  joint  debates  on  the  stump 
in  Illinois,  made  clearer  than  before  the  divergence  of  sec 
tional  views  and  policies.  In  October  the  echoing  of  Lin 
coln's  house-divided-against-itself  speech  by  Seward  in  his 
irrepressible-conflict  speech  at  Rochester,  together  with  the 
sweeping  Republican  victories  in  former  Democratic  North 
ern  states  in  the  congressional  elections,  increased  the 
Southern  apprehensions  of  impending  oppression  at  the  hands 
of  the  overpowering  North. 

Davis  and  Brown,  the  Senators  from  Mississippi,  were 
the  chief  spokesmen  of  Southern  defiance  in  Congress.  But 
more  important  than  congressional  occurrences  at  the  time 
was  the  popular  campaign  which  William  L.  Yancey  now 
opened  afresh  for  Southern  independence.  In  a  speech  in 
the  Southern  Commercial  Congress  at  Montgomery  in  May, 
1858,  he  lamented  that  -procrastination  so  abounded.  All 
the  existing  sectional  issues  combined,  said  he,  "may  yet 
produce  spirit  enough  to  lead  us  forward,  to  call  forth  a 
Lexington,  to  fight  a  Bunker  Hill,  to  drive  the  foe  from  the 
city  of  our  rights."  He  thought  it  better  to  secede  at  once 
than  to  wait  for  the  election  of  a  Republican  President.  He 
continued:  "My  learned  colleague  says  wait;  the  gentle 
man  from  Virginia  says  wait.  This  everlasting  waiting  is 
the  destruction  of  opportunity."  To  promote  his  purpose 
Yancey  proposed  the  organization  of  committees  of  safety 
throughout  the  cotton  states  to  keep  the  cause  alive  and 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  173 

to  provide  concert  of  action  when  conditions  should  become 
ripe  for  a  stroke  for  independence.*  This  proposal,  however, 
received  no  general  endorsement.  In  Georgia  a  news 
paper  entitled  the  Southern  Confederacy  was  established 
at  Atlanta  at  the  beginning  of  1859,  committed  to  the  doc 
trine  of  state  sovereignty  in  fullest  measure  and  to  the 
policies  of  admitting  Kansas  only  as  a  slave  state,  of  legaliz 
ing  the  African  slave-trade,  and  of  acquiring  Mexico,  Central 
America  and  the  West  Indies.  But  the  people  of  Georgia 
declined  to  support  these  aggressive  policies  and  they  allowed 
this  journal  to  languish  with  slight  patronage.  The  people 
preferred  to  look  to  their  own  chosen  watchmen  for  warnings 
and  advice,  and  all  the  party  leaders  in  the  state  were  agreed 
for  the  time  in  counseling  against  sectional  agitation.  Some 
were  hopeful  and  some  were  hoping  against  hope,  but  all 
were  disposed  to  keep  the  South  quiet  for  the  while  in  order 
to  prevent  her  interests,  so  much  as  possible,  from  being 
tossed  about  in  the  intrigues  of  Northern  politicians. 

Buchanan  and  his  allies  had  laid  a  plan  to  destroy  Douglas's 
presidential  prospects  for  1860  by  causing  the  Charleston 
convention  to  insert  a  non-intervention  plank  in  its  plat 
form,  embodying  the  Dred  Scott  doctrine  as  against  that 
of  squatter  sovereignty.  Both  Toombs  and  Stephens, 
distrusting  Buchanan  personally  and  impressed  by  recent 
Democratic  disasters,  deprecated  Buchanan's  war  upon 
Douglas  as  tending  to  disrupt  the  Democratic  party  and 
ensure  Republican  triumph.  Stephens  remonstrated  with 
Buchanan,f  and  finding  him  resolute,  washed  his  own  hands 
of  responsibility  for  further  troubles  by  declining  to  serve 
longer  in  Congress.  Stephens's  true  reason  for  retirement, 
in  addition  to  his  feeling  of  fatigue,  was  expressed  by  him  in 

*  J.  W.  DuBose,  Life  of  William  Lowndes  Yancey,  Birmingham,  Ala., 
1882,  pp.  361-364;  W.  G.  Brown,  The  Lower  in  South  American  History, 
N.  Y.,  1902,  p.  141. 

t  Johnston  and  Browne,  Life  of  Stephens,  pp.  347,  348. 


174  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

a  letter  to  Dr.  Z.  P.  Landrum  of  Lexington,  Ga.,  July  I, 
1860:  "It  was  in  prospects  of  the  events  we  have  now  upon 
us, '  the  shadows'  of  which  I  saw  in  advance  of  their  approach, 
with  the  full  conviction  and  consciousness  that  /  could  do 
nothing  to  avert  them,  that  caused  me  to  retire  from  that 
position  of  responsibility  I  had  held  so  long,  and  in  which 
I  felt  satisfied  I  could  no  longer  be  useful."  *  In  a  speech 
to  his  constituents  at  Augusta  at  the  time  of  his  withdrawal, 
July  2,  1859,  Stephens  was  less  frank.  He  said  in  the  midst 
of  it: 

"All  those  great  sectional  questions  which  so  furiously 
in  their  turn  agitated  the  public  mind,  forboding  disaster, 
and  which  from  my  connection  with  them  caused  me  to 
remain  so  long  at  the  post  you  assigned  me,  have  been 
amicably  and  satisfactorily  adjusted,  without  the  sacrifice 
of  any  principle  or  the  loss  of  any  essential  right.  At  this 
time  there  is  not  a  ripple  upon  the  surface.  The  country 
was  never  in  a  profounder.  quiet,  or  the  people  from  one 
extent  of  it  to  the  other  in  a  more  perfect  enjoyment  of  the 
blessings  of  peace  and  prosperity  secured  by  those  institu 
tions  for  which  we  should  feel  no  less  grateful  than  proud. 
It  is  at  such  a  time,  and  with  these  views  of  its  condition, 
that  I  cease  all  active  connection  with  its  affairs."  f 

Stephens  was,  in  fact,  bewildered  as  well  as  disheartened 
by  the  distressful  complications  in  party  and  sectional 
affairs,  and  was  not  yet  ready  to  take  the  field  against  the 
programme  of  Buchanan  and  his  associates. 

Within  a  fortnight  of  the  pacifist  utterance  of  Stephens 
at  Augusta  a  sharply  conflicting  view  of  conditions  and 
prospects  was  expressed  by  Alfred  Iverson,  junior  Senator 
from  Georgia,  in  a  speech  at  his  home  in  the  town  of  Griffin 
on  July  14.  Asserting  that  the  faction-split  Northern  Democ 
racy  was  "paralyzed  and  powerless,"  he  declared  that  the 
coming  year  would  witness  the  election  of  a  Republican 
President,  and  that,  considering  such  an  event  a  declaration 

*  Henry  Cleveland,  Stephens,  p.  669.          f  Ibid.,  p.  639. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  175 

of  war  against  slavery,  he  would  favor,  upon  its  occurrence, 
the  prompt  establishment  of  a  separate  Southern  con 
federacy.  Meanwhile  he  advocated  the  repudiation  of  all 
concessions  by  the  South.  He  combined  the  Missouri  Com 
promise,  the  Wilmot  Proviso,  the  legislation  of  1850  and  the 
Kansas  act  in  one  sweeping  denunciation  as  a  series  of  in 
fringements  upon  Southern  rights.  He  said  he  had  once  em 
braced  the  squatter-sovereignty  heresy,  but  now  repudiated 
it  and  advocated  a  square  defiance  to  the  abolition  party  by 
an  unconditional  demand  for  the  fullest  protection  to  slave 
property  in  all  regards  within  the  field  of  controversy.* 
Iverson's  speech  was  of  course  published  broadcast  by  the 
same  newspapers  which  had  printed  Stephens's  "farewell 
speech"  the  week  before.  The  conflict  of  these  expressions 
furnished  material  for  hot  discussion  by  press  and  people 
throughout  the  summer.  Iverson's  analysis  was  of  course 
the  more  true,  but  Stephens's  reputation  and  personal  follow 
ing  were  far  the  greater;  and  the  people  with  customary 
optimism  generally  accepted  the  prophecy  of  calm  and 
rejected  that  of  storm. 

The  course  of  party  developments  within  the  state  in  1859 
was  such  as  to  promote  for  the  time  being  a  Union-saving 
disposition.  The  executive  committee  of  the  Know-nothing 
party,  supported  by  resolutions  of  massmeetings  at  LaGrange 
and  elsewhere,  issued  an  address  in  effect  dissolving  that 
party  in  Georgia,  but  denouncing  maladministration  by 
the  Democrats  in  state  and  nation,  and  inviting  all  citizens 
who  were  opposed  to  the  Democratic  party  to  join  in  an. 
"opposition  convention"  to  meet  on  the  third  Wednesday 
in  July.  On  account  of  confusion  between  Macon  and  Mil- 
ledgeville  as  the  place  of  meeting,  this  convention  was  a 
failure.  The  delegates  who  met  at  Macon,  however,  adopted 
a  platform  endorsing  the  Federal  Constitution  and  the  Dred 
Scott  judgment,  denouncing  the  squatter-sovereignty  doc- 

*  Federal  Union,  July  26,  1859;  I.  W.  Avery,  History  of  Georgia,  p.  104. 


176  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

trine  as  a  delusion,  condemning  the  futher  agitation  of  the 
slavery  question,  and  censuring  the  extravagance  and  corrup 
tion  of  the  Democratic  administrations.  The  meeting  then 
called  a  second  "opposition  convention"  to  meet  in  Atlanta 
on  August  10,  and  adjourned.  At  this  second  convention 
the  proceedings  of  the  Macon  meeting  were  ratified,  and 
Warren  Aiken  was  nominated  for  Governor.*  Benjamin 
H.  Hill  was  the  leading  figure  in  the  movement,  but  he  was 
not  disposed  to  invite  a  second  sure  defeat  by  running  again 
for  the  governorship  at  this  time.  He  endorsed  Aiken's 
candidacy  in  a  public  letter,  in  which  he  denounced  squatter 
sovereignty  on  constitutional  grounds  and  declared  that 
the  election  of  Douglas  would  be  for  all  practical  purposes 
equivalent  to  the  election  of  a  "Black  Republican."  f 
From  the  beginning  of  this  movement  its  promoters  expected 
it  to  form  part  of  a  "Constitutional  Union"  party  in  1860, 
appealing  to  men  in  all  quarters  of  the  country  to  quell 
the  sectional  wrangling.  { 

The  Democratic  convention  for  the  gubernatorial  cam 
paign  met  at  Milledgeville  on  June  15,  1859,  and  filled  its 
session  with  excited  debate  between  those  who  wished  to 
adopt  resolutions:  (i)  endorsing  the  Cincinnati  platform, 
(2)  expressing  confidence  in  the  patriotism  of  Buchanan 
and  approval  of  his  inaugural  address  and  annual  message, 
and  (3)  nominating  Joseph  E.  Brown  for  Governor;  and 
those  on  the  other  hand  who  wanted  merely  to  nominate 
Brown  and  adjourn.  Toombs,  who  was  not  present,  had 
expressed  himself  in  favor  of  an  endorsement  of  the  adminis 
tration  in  the  usual  resolutions  of  confidence.  Chastain 
and  Wright  were  the  chief  advocates  of  this  policy  in  the 
convention,  and  Jones  of  Columbus  the  chief  opponent. 

*  Southern  Recorder,  July  26  and  Aug.  16,  1859. 
t  Ibid.,  Aug.  9,  1859. 

J  Editorial  from  the  Savannah  Republican,  reprinted  in  the  Southern 
Recorder,  May  10,  1859. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  177 

When  the  vote  was  taken,  the  first  and  third  resolutions 
were  adopted  unanimously  and  the  second  by  274  votes  to 
34.  Brown  was  then  brought  in  to  make  a  speech,  the 
burden  of  which  was  that  though  he  could  not  approve 
everything  done  by  the  national  administration,  he  depre 
cated  discord  in  the  party  and  hoped  that  the  Democracy 
would  be  kept  united.* 

Toombs  endorsed  this  position  on  Brown's  part  in  a  widely 
circulated  speech  which  he  delivered  at  Augusta  on  Sep 
tember  8,  1859.  He  said  in  regard  to  the  Kansas  bill  and 
later  developments: 

"When  we  condemned  and  abrogated  congressional  inter 
vention  against  us,  that  was  a  great  point  gained.  Congress 
had  actually  excluded  us  from  the  territories  for  thirty  years. 
The  people  of  a  territory  had  in  no  instance  attempted  such 
an  iniquity.  I  considered  it  wise,  prudent  and  politic  to 
settle  the  question  against  our  common  enemy,  Congress, 
even  if  I  left  it  unsettled  as  to  our  known  friends,  the  people 
of  the  territories.  We  could  not  settle  the  question  of  the 
power  of  the  people  over  slavery  while  in  a  territorial  con 
dition,  because  Democrats  differed  on  that  point.  We 
therefore  declared  in  the  Kansas  bill  that  we  left  the  people 
of  the  territories  perfectly  free  to  form  and  regulate  their 
domestic  institutions  in  their  own  way,  subject  only  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States.  We  decided  to  refer 
the  question  to  the  Supreme  Court.  It  has  gone  there 
and  been  decided  in  our  favor.  The  Southern  friends  of 
the  measure  repudiate  the  principle  of  squatter  sovereignty. 
I  stand  its  steady  and  uncompromising  adversary.  The 
doctrine  of  Douglas  has  not  a  leg  to  stand  upon.  Yet  I  do 
not  belong  to  those  who  denounce  him.  The  organization 
of  the  Democratic  party  leaves  this  an  open  question,  and 
Mr.  Douglas  is  at  full  liberty  to  take  either  side  he  may 
choose,  and  if  he  maintains  his  ancient  ground  of  neither 
making  nor  accepting  new  tests  of  political  soundness  I 
shall  consider  him  a  political  friend  and  will  accept  him  as 

*  Stenographic  report  of  the  convention's  proceedings,  in  the  Southern 
Recorder,  June  21,  1859. 


178  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

the  representative  of  the  party  whenever  it  may  tender  him; 
and  in  the  meantime  if  he  should  even  wander  after  strange 
gods,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  tell  you  that  with  his  errors  I  pre 
fer  him  and  would  support  him  tomorrow  against  any  oppo 
sition  man  in  America.  We  are  told  that  we  must  put  a  new 
plank  in  the  platform  of  the  Democratic  party,  and  demand 
the  affirmance  of  the  duty  of  Congress  to  protect  slavery  in 
a  territory  where  such  territory  may  fail  to  discharge  this 
duty.  I  reply,  I  do  not  think  it  wise  to  do  the  thing  proposed. 
.  .  .  No;  I  shall  prescribe  no  new  test  of  party  fealty  to 
Northern  Democrats,  those  men  who  have  hitherto  stood 
with  honor  and  fidelity  upon  their  engagements.  They 
have  maintained  the  truth  to  their  own  hurt.  They  have 
displayed  a  patriotism,  a  magnanimity  rarely  equaled  in 
the  world's  history,  and  I  shall  endeavor  in  sunshine  and  in 
storm,  with  your  approbation  if  I  can  get  it,  without  it  if 
I  must,  to  stand  by  them  with  fidelity  equal  to  their  great 
deserts.  If  you  will  stand  with  me  we  shall  conquer  faction 
in  North  and  South,  and  shall  save  the  country  from  the 
curse  of  being  ruled  by  the  combination  now  calling  itself 
the  opposition.  We  shall  leave  this  country  to  our  children 
as  we  found  it  —  united,  strong,  prosperous  and  happy."  * 

Toombs  was  at  this  time,  clearly,  still  cherishing  the  pacific 
hope  of  preserving  the  Union  under  a  broad-policied  Demo 
cratic  administration,  and  still  considered  himself  bound  to 
labor  with  all  strength  to  that  end.  But  at  the  middle 
of  the  following  month  the  occurrence  of  John  Brown's 
raid  at  Harper's  Ferry,  and  in  December  the  wrangles  in 
the  House  in  the  speakership  deadlock,  together  with  the 
increasing  obstruction  of  fugitive-slave  rendition  in  the 
Northern  states,  destroyed  most  of  his  remaining  optimism. 
He  wrote  Stephens  on  December  26:  "I  shall  make  a  speech 
very  early  after  the  holidays  reviewing  calmly  the  state  of 
the  country,  the  evils,  remedies,  effects  and  consequences. 
I  shall  make  a  clean  breast  of  it,  'nothing  extenuate  nor 
set  down  aught  in  malice';  but  I  shall  not  withhold  the 

*  Southern  Recorder,  Sept.  13  and  Oct.  4,  1859;  Stovall,  Toombs,  pp. 
165-168. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    i;860  179 

truth  because  it  may  be  unpalatable  or  even  dangerous  to 
anybody  or  any  section."  This  speech  was  delivered  in 
the  Senate  on  January  24,  1860,  nominally  upon  the  resolu 
tion  offered  by  Mr.  Douglas  directing  the  judiciary  com 
mittee  to  report  a  bill  for  the  protection  of  each  state  and 
territory  against  invasion  by  the  authorities  and  inhabitants 
of  every  other  state  and  territory.  It  was  an  elaborate 
review  of  the  situation  and  a  superb  statement  of  his  own 
position.  He  said: 

"Mr.  President  and  Senators:  The  legislation  proposed  by 
the  resolution  on  your  table  opens  a  new  page  in  the  history 
of  our  country.  Such  legislation  clearly  falls  within  the 
constitutional  powers  of  Congress,  and  is  a  step  in  the  right 
direction.  I  accept  it  as  an  effort  to  enable  the  federal 
government  to  perform  its  duty  on  this  subject  by  preserv 
ing  peace  among  these  confederate  states.  But,  sir,  I  fear 
that  the  disease  lies  too  deep  for  the  remedy.  But  it  is 
suggestive,  and  furnishes  a  standpoint  from  which  we  may 
well  survey  the  state  of  the  republic  —  its  past,  its  present 
and  its  future. 

"Hitherto  this  government  has  been  enabled  to  grapple 
with  and  surmount  all  the  difficulties,  foreign  or  domestic, 
which  have  impeded  its  course  or  threatened  its  safety.  .  .  . 
Some  of  them  rose  to  the  dignity  of  constitutional  questions; 
but  none  of  them  involved  the  existence  or  permanent  safety 
of  society;  and  when  submitted  to  the  arbitrament  of  the 
ballot-box,  all  men  submitted  quietly  to  the  result,  because 
the  fundamental  principles  of  the  social  fabric  were  not 
affected  by  the  result.  Now  all  this  has  changed.  The 
feeling  of  nationality,  of  loyalty  to  the  State,  the  feeling 
of  a  common  interest  and  a  common  destiny,  upon  which 
foundations  alone  society  can  securely  and  .permanently 
rest,  is  gradually  but  rapidly  passing  away.  Hostility  to 
the  compact  of  Union,  to  the  tie  which  binds  us  together, 
animates  the  bosoms  and  finds  utterance  in  the  tongues  of 
millions  of  our  countrymen,  and  leads  to  the  habitual  dis 
regard  of  its  plainest  duties  and  obligations.  Large  bodies 
of  men  now  feel  and  know  that  party  success  involves  public 
danger,  that  the  result  may  bring  us  face  to  face  with  revolu- 


180  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

tion.  Senators,  we  all  feel  it  in  this  chamber;  we  hear  it 
proclaimed  here  every  day.  .  .  . 

"The  public  danger  can  only  be  averted  by  the  removal 
of  its  real  causes.  These  causes  are  plain,  palpable,  apparent 
to  the  lowest  comprehension.  The  fundamental  principles  of 
the  system  of  our  social  Union  are  assailed,  invaded  and 
threatened  with  destruction;  our  ancient  rights  and  liberties 
are  in  danger;  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  our  homes  have 
been  invaded  by  lawless  violence,  and  their  further  invasion 
is  imminent;  the  instinct  of  self-preservation  arouses  society 
to  their  defense.  These  are  the  causes  which  are  under 
mining,  and  which  if  not  soon  arrested  will  overthrow  the 
Republic.  .  .  . 

"We  are  virtually  in  civil  war,  and  these  are  the  causes 
of  it.  It  is  known  and  felt  on  this  floor.  I  feel  and  know 
that  a  large  body  of  these  Senators  are  enemies  of  my 
country.  I  know  they  and  their  associates  have  used  the 
power  which  has  been  placed  in  their  hands  by  many  of  the 
states,  to  assail  and  destroy  the  institutions  of  these  confed 
erate  states.  I  know  that  under  color  of  the  liberty  of  speech, 
even  in  these  halls,  day  by  day  and  year  after  year  they  have 
thundered  their  denunciations  against  slavery  and  slave 
holders,  against  confederates  and  their  institutions,  and  thus 
seek  to  apply  the  torch  to  our  homesteads  and  to  desolate 
our  land  with  servile  and  internecine  war.  Sir,  the  present 
state  of  things  is  no  longer  compatible  with  our  security  nor 
our  honor.  We  demand  peace  or  war.  We  prefer  peace; 
we  have  sought  it  through  peaceful  channels;  but  though 
the  road  to  it  shall  lead  through  war,  we  intend  to  have  it.  ... 

"These  public  enemies  are  Abolitionists,  who  have  formed 
a  coalition  with  all  the  waifs  and  strays  —  deserters  of  all 
former  political  parties  —  and  the  better  to  conceal  their 
real  purposes  have  assumed  the  name  of  the  Republican 
party.  This  coalition  has  but  one  living,  animating  prin 
ciple,  and  that  is  hatred  of  the  people  and  institutions  of 
the  slaveholding  states  of  this  Union.  This  coalition  has 
evinced  by  its  acts,  its  declarations,  a  fixed  and  determined 
purpose,  in  spite  of  the  Constitution,  in  spite  of  their  own 
solemn  engagements  to  obey  and  maintain  it,  and  in  spite  of 
all  the  obligations  which  rest  on  every  member  of  every 
civilized  state,  to  limit,  to  restrain,  and  finally  to  subvert, 
the  institutions  of  fifteen  states  of  the  Union. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  181 

"Sir,  I  know  these  are  strong  charges;  I  have  not  made 
them  lightly.  I  speak  in  sorrow,  not  in  anger.  I  make 
them  with  pain,  not  pleasure.  I  feel  it  a  duty  I  owe  to  my 
country,  to  my  whole  country,  to  speak  the  truth  plainly, 
that  the  people  may  know  and  perchance  avert  the  public 
calamity.  I  feel  deeply  the  obligation  which  rests  upon  me 
to  sustain  them  by  clear  and  irrefragable  proofs  before  the 
Senate,  the  country  and  the  civilized  world;  to  that  duty 
I  now  proceed. 

"I  charge,  first,  that  this  organization  has  annulled  and 
made  of  none  effect  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  Con 
stitution  of  the  United  States  in  many  of  the  states  of  this 
Union,  and  have  endeavored  and  are  endeavoring  to  accom 
plish  the  same  result  in  all  the  non-slaveholding  states. 

"Secondly.  I  charge  them  with  openly  attempting  to 
deprive  the  people  of  the  slaveholding  states  of  their  equal 
enjoyment  of,  and  equal  rights  in,  the  common  territories 
of  the  United  States,  as  expounded  by  the  Supreme  Court, 
and  of  seeking  to  get  control  of  the  federal  government  with 
the  intent  to  enable  them  to  accomplish  this  result  by  the 
overthrow  of  the  federal  judiciary. 

"Thirdly.  I  charge  that  large  numbers  of  persons  belong 
ing  to  this  organization  are  daily  committing  offenses 
against  the  people  and  property  of  these  confederate  states, 
which,  by  the  laws  of  nations,  are  good  and  sufficient  causes 
of  war  even  among  independent  states;  and  governors  and 
legislatures  of  states,  elected  by  them,  have  repeatedly 
committed  similar  acts. 

"Now,  for  these  causes,  I  maintain  that  this  coalition  is 
unfit  to  rule  over  a  free  people;  and  its  possession  of  the 
federal  government  is  a  just  cause  of  war  by  the  people 
whose  safety  is  thereby  put  in  jeopardy." 

He  then  quoted  the  Constitution  and  showed  the  con 
stitutionality  of  the  rendition  acts  of  1793  and  1850,  sum 
marized  the  statutes  of  nine  Northern  states  nullifying 
these  acts  of  Congress,  censured  the  nullifying  procedure  of 
the  Wisconsin  superior  court,  sketched  the  territorial  strife, 
and  denounced  abolitionist  incendiarism,  and  particularly 
condemned  John  Sherman,  then  candidate  of  the  Republi 
cans  for  the  speakership  of  the  House,  for  endorsing,  along 


182  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

with  sixty-seven  other  members  of  Congress,  the  publication 
of  Helper's  Impending  Crisis.  Repeating  his  charges  of 
Republican  responsibility  for  these  things  and  for  the  John 
Brown  raid,  he  continued: 

"It  is  in  vain,  in  the  face  of  these  injuries,  to  talk  of  peace, 
fraternity,  and  a  common  country.  There  is  no  peace; 
there  is  no  fraternity;  there  is  no  common  country.  I 
and  you  and  all  of  us  know  it.  My  country  is  not  common 
to  the  men  who  would  counsel  the  overthrow  of  her  system 
by  social  and  servile  war  and  all  of  its  attendant  horrors, 
and  I  trust  never  will  be.  ...  I  submit  it  to  the  judgment 
of  the  Senate,  the  country  and  the  civilized  world,  if,  accord 
ing  to  the  public  law  of  all  civilized  nations,  we  have  not 
just  cause  of  war  against  our  confederates  ?  I  further  submit, 
that  our  duty  and  our  security  require  us  to  accept  it  speedily, 
unless  we  can  get  redress  through  the  operation  of  the  govern 
ment,  or  of  the  states  of  whose  citizens  we  complain.  To 
them  we  make  this  final  appeal.  Give  us  the  compact;  give 
us  peace.  Disturb  no  longer  our  domestic  tranquillity. 

"To  make  this  appeal  effectual  it  is  our  duty  at  the  South, 
first,  to  crush  out  the  party  divisions  which  exist  among 
ourselves;  to  unite  with  all  men  who  feel  the  wrongs  of  their 
country  and  who  are  willing  to  unite  for  their  redress;  who 
have  no  affiliation  or  sympathy  with  Black  Republicanism 
in  any  of  its  forms,  and  are  ready  to  drive  them  from  the 
national  councils." 

In  concluding  the  speech  he  addressed,  as  will  be  seen,  a 
peroration  to  the  people  of  Georgia: 

"Sir,  I  have  little  more  to  add:  nothing  for  myself.  I 
feel  that  I  have  no  need  to  pledge  my  poor  services  to  this 
great  cause,  to  my  country.  My  state  has  spoken  for 
herself.  Nine  years  ago  a  convention  of  her  people  met  and 
declared  that  her  connection  with  this  government  depended 
upon  the  faithful  execution  of  this  fugitive  slave  law  and  her 
full  enjoyment  of  equal  rights  in  the  common  territories.  I 
have  shown  that  the  one  contingency  has  already  arrived; 
the  other  waits  only  the  success  of  the  Republican  party 
in  the  approaching  presidential  election.  I  was  a  member 
of  that  convention,  and  stood  then  and  now  pledged  to  its 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  183 

action.  I  have  faithfully  labored  to  avert  these  calamities. 
I  will  yet  labor  until  this  last  contingency  happens,  faith 
fully,  honestly,  and  to  the  best  of  my  poor  abilities.  When 
that  time  comes,  freemen  of  Georgia,  redeem  your  pledge: 
I  am  ready  to  redeem  mine.  Your  honor  is  involved,  your 
faith  is  plighted.  I  know  you  feel  a  stain  as  a  wound;  your 
peace,  your  social  system,  your  firesides  are  involved. 
Never  permit  this  federal  government  to  pass  into  the  trai 
torous  hands  of  the  Black  Republican  party.  It  has  already 
declared  war  against  you  and  your  institutions.  It  every 
day  commits  acts  of  war  against  you;  it  has  already  com 
pelled  you  to  arm  you  for  your  defense.  Listen  to  'no  vain 
babblings/  to  no  treacherous  jargon  about  'overt  acts';  they 
have  already  been  committed.  Defend  yourselves.  The 
enemy  is  at  your  door;  wait  not  to  meet  him  at  the  hearth 
stone  —  meet  him  at  the  doorsill  and  drive  from  the  temple 
of  liberty,  or  pull  down  its  pillars  and  involve  him  in  a  com 
mon  ruin."  * 

In  this,  which  promptly  became  famous  as  the  "doorsill 
speech"  Toombs  still  pleaded  for  the  security  of  Southern 
rights  within  the  Union,  and  urged  the  union  of  all  patriotic 
elements,  great  and  small,  to  avert  the  disrupting  culmina 
tion  of  a  Republican  triumph.  In  a  letter  to  Stephens  on 
January  31  Toombs  said  that  his  speech  had  been  effectual 
in  defeating  Sherman's  candidacy  for  the  speakership,  and 
that  Pennington  of  New  Jersey,  a  more  colorless  man,  would 
probably  be  elected.  This  prophecy  was  promptly  realized. 
On  February  10  Toombs  wrote  again  to  Stephens  at  greater 
length,  alluding  further  to  the  election  of  Pennington  which 
had  then  taken  place,  discussing  the  reception  of  his  own 
doorsill  speech  and  stating  his  position  upon  fresh  issues  then 
arising.  He  wrote  in  part: 

"The  defeat  of  Sherman  was  gall  and  wormwood  to  the 
Seward  division  of  the  Blacks.  It  brought  them  into 
national  discredit  and  strengthened  the  opposition  to 
Seward  inside  his  party.  My  points  on  them,  especially 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  36th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  88-93. 


1 84  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

in  the  fugitive  slave  case,  have  told  even  stronger  than  I 
supposed  at  the  North.  The  party  are  dumfounded  here. 
No  man  among  them  as  yet  has  dared  to  come  up  to  their 
defense,  thoj  next  week  I  am  told  Hale,  Foot  and  Fessenden 
will  come  back  at  me.  If  they  are  fools  enough  to  keep  up 
that  fight  we  shall  whip  them  even  in  several  of  the  New 
England  states.  .  .  . 

"You  have  doubtless  seen  that  Brown,  Davis  and  Pugh 
have  all  introduced  resolutions  concerning  slavery  in  the 
territories.  Davis's  are  those  approved  by  the  Pres[iden]t 
and  are  in  the  main  good;  but  I  think  all  of  them  are  wrong. 
It  is  the  very  foolishness  of  folly  to  raise  and  make  prominent 
such  issues  now.  By  the  Kansas  act  of  1854  we  repealed 
the  Missouri  restriction,  declared  our  purpose  as  far  as  pos 
sible  to  remove  the  question  of  slavery  from  the  halls  of 
Congress,  and  therefore  gave  the  territorial  legislatures 
all  the  power  over  it  which  the  Constitution  allowed  them 
to  exercise,  and  to  test  that  limit  provided  that  all  cases 
involving  liberty  might  be  appealed  to  the  Supreme  Court. 
The  court  has  decided  that  Congress  cannot  prohibit  slavery 
in  the  territories,  and  altho'  I  think  it  involves  the  power 
of  the  territorial  legislatures  also,  yet  it  is  true  that  that 
precise  point  has  never  come  directly  before  the  court  and 
never  may.  It  has  not  arisen  in  seventy  years,  it  may  not 
arise  in  seventy  years  more.  Why  then  press  it  now,  when 
we  have  just  as  much  weight  as  we  can  possibly  carry? 
Hostility  to  Douglas  is  the  sole  motive  of  movers  of  this 
mischief.  I  wish  Douglas  defeated  at  Charleston,  but  I 
do  not  want  him  and  his  friends  crippled  or  driven  off. 
Where  are  we  to  get  as  many  or  as  good  men  in  the  North 
to  supply  their  places?  .  .  .  The  Democratic  caucus  meets 
tomorrow  to  try  to  carry  out  this  business.  I  shall  resist 
it  to  the  last  extremity." 

During  the  next  few  weeks  the  debate  was  continued  upon 
the  sectional  issue,  during  which  Toombs  took  occasion 
to  repeat  a  denial  which  he  had  already  made  of  the  absurd 
report  that  he  had  said  that  he  expected  to  call  the  roll  of 
his  slaves  at  the  foot  of  Bunker  Hill  monument.*  Toombs 
found  occasion  on  February  27  to  give  further  elaboration 
*  Congressional  Globe,  36th  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  p.  838. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  185 

to  the  argument  of  his  "doorsill  speech";  and  on  March 
7  he  delivered  a  powerful  impromptu  in  reply  to  an  attack 
upon  his  position  by  Mr.  Wade.  After  reasserting  the 
position  he  had  already  taken,  he  said  in  part: 

"  You  say  we  have  governed  the  country  for  seventy  years. 
Admit  it  to  be  true,  and  what  higher  compliment  can  be  paid 
the  'slave  power*  which  you  every  day  denounce.  .  .  .  We 
have  maintained  the  true  principles  of  the  Constitution. 
We  have  reconciled  liberty  with  order;  maintained  the 
public  tranquillity  by  striving  for  equal  justice  to  all  men 
and  all  sections  of  our  common  country.  You  daily  sing 
peans  to  our  success  in  this  mighty  work  of  the  well-govern 
ment  of  a  great  country,  and  yet  seek  to  wrest  it  from  those 
who  you  admit  have  achieved  these  grand  and  unparalleled 
results.  You  seek  to  subvert  their  policy  and  substitute 
for  it  your  own  crude  and  reckless  theories,  which  have 
produced  nothing  but  discord  in  the  past  and  promise 
nothing  but  ruin  in  the  future.  .  .  . 

"  If  the  South  has  governed  this  country,  she  has  served 
it  with  unselfish  devotion.  .  .  .  They  have  sought  no  exclu 
sive  privileges,  no  protection,  no  bounties  at  your  hands. 
They  have  paid  their  taxes,  fought  the  battles  of  their  coun 
try,  and  claim  only  at  your  hands  the  peaceful  enjoyment 
of  the  fruits  of  their  own  honest  toil.  But  this  has  not  been 
the  case  with  the  people  of  the  non-slaveholding  states. 
From  1789  to  this  day,  a  continual,  incessant  cry  has  come 
up  to  the  Capitol  from  them  for  protection,  prohibition  and 
bounties.  .  .  .  The  Government  has  listened  and  granted 
their  requests.  .  .  .  Nineteen-twentieths  of  the  whole  legis 
lation  of  Congress  is  for  and  on  account  of  the  non-slave- 
holding  states.  We  have  asked  none,  sought  none.  My 
business  here,  and  that  of  my  colleagues  from  the  South, 
has  been  chiefly  to  mitigate  your  exactions.  Day  after  day 
are  we  reminded  of  the  strong  declaration  of  a  distinguished 
representative  from  South  Carolina,  that  he  nor  his  con 
stituents  ever  felt  the  federal  government  except  by  its 
exactions.  Apart  from  the  protection  which  the  very  fact 
of  living  in  a  powerful  government  gives  us  against  foreign 
aggression,  our  portion  of  the  benefits  of  the  federal  govern 
ment  are  difficult  to  estimate.  We  have  not  generally  com 
plained  of  this  inequality;  our  pursuits  were  different; 


186  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

we  were  content  that  the  great  interests  of  the  country  were 
benefited,  though  to  a  large  extent  to  our  cost.  As  country 
men,  we  listened  kindly  to  your  petitions  to  protect  you 
against  your  foreign  competitors.  We  had  none.  We 
were  better  satisfied  because  the  thing  was  done  under  the 
name  of  paying  taxes  to  government,  and  we  had  not  been 
taught  to  consider  ourselves  as  aliens  in  your  part  of  a  com 
mon  country.  This  has  changed.  The  fault  lies  not  at  our 
door.  .  .  . 

"The  Senator  from  Ohio  is  mistaken;  his  reproach  that  the 
South  is  always  clamoring  for  legislation  is  unjust.  .  .  .  We 
ask  you  to  deliver  up  our  fugitives  from  labor  when  they 
escape  from  service.  You  refuse  or  defeat  it.  We  ask 
that  all  the  people  of  all  the  states  shall  freely  enter  all  the 
common  territories  with  their  property,  enjoy  it  in  peace 
and  quiet  under  the  protection  of  a  common  government, 
until  they  shall  be  severally  matured  into  states,  and  ad 
mitted  into  the  Union;  and  then  we  agree  that,  as  sovereign 
states,  they  may  make  their  domestic  policy  such  as  they 
please.  If  they  do  not  want  African  slavery,  let  them  say 
so,  and  abolish  it.  You  pretend  you  will  not  interfere  with 
our  institutions  in  the  states.  We  do  not  believe  you.  It 
is  true  the  Constitution  forbids  it;  but  you  have  shown  so 
utter  a  disregard  of  that  instrument  in  reference  to  fugitive 
slaves  that  we  cannot  trust  your  loyalty.  .  .  . 

"  What  a  huge  imposition  is  this  same  Black  Republican 
party!  They  proclaim  every  day  their  detestation  and  horror 
of  slavery.  .  .  .  But  if  anyone  even  suggests  the  possibility 
of  cutting  them  loose  from  this  body  of  death,  what  a 
patriotic  rage  do  they  manifest!  Oh,  no!  They  will  die 
first.  They  hug  the  putrid  carcass  to  their  bosoms,  and 
threaten  us  with  'eighteen  million'  Black  Republicans, 
carrying  death  and  slaughter  into  the  peaceful  abodes  of 
their  deliverers.  If  they  believed  half  they  say,  they  ought 
to  be  for  disunion.  They  should  struggle  continually  to 
be  relieved  of  this  'covenant  with  death,  this  league  with 
hell.'  They  seem  to  have  precisely  enough  of  this  'sum 
of  all  villainies,'  and  they  will  perish  ere  they  part  with  one 
sixteenth  part  of  a  hair  of  it.  There  is  no  harmony  between 
their  professions  and  their  conduct;  this  argues  hypocrisy, 
not  sincerity.  If  you  honestly  want  to  relieve  your  souls 
from  the  guilt  of  complicity  with  slaveholding,  say  so  with 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  187 

manly  firmness.     We  will  give  you  a  discharge  whenever 
you  want  it."  * 

Mr.  Wade  had  been  quoted  a  few  weeks  previously  f 
as  having  said  in  the  Senate  in  1856:  "There  is  really  no 
Union  now  between  the  North  and  the  South;  and  he 
believed  that  no  two  nations  upon  earth  entertain  feelings 
of  more  bitter  rancor  towards  each  other  than  these  two 
nations  of  the  Republic."  But  by  1860  when  the  anti- 
slavery  cause  was  about  to  reach  the  ascendant,  he  recanted 
his  recognition  of  the  probable  emergence  of  two  nations  from 
the  one.  Following  Toombs's  reply  to  him  above  quoted 
he  rejoined: 

"jl  have  only  a  word  to  say  in  reply.  ...  As  for  Ohio 
coming  here  and  calling  for  any  money  out  of  the  treasury, 
I  think  the  Senator  can  hardly  say  that  she  has  been  very 
often  here  for  that  or  any  other  purpose.  Let  her  alone 
and  she  is  well  content.  As  to  the  talk  of  dissolving  the 
Union,  I  have  nothing  to  say.  You  may  talk  about  the  South 
going  out,  but  I  can  see  well  enough  that  she  will  never  go 
out.  I  see  with  perfect  clearness  that  we  must  live  together 
whether  we  will  or  not.  We  cannot  get  a  divorce.  If  you 
go  out,  your  states  will  be  left  occupying  the  same  relations 
to  us  as  now;  and  whether  the  Union  existed  or  not,  the 
same  controversies  would  arise,  and  perhaps  in  a  much  more 
aggravated  form  than  they  do  now.  You  may  say:  'let 
us  go  off  if  you  do  not  like  our  institutions/  but  there  is 
no  letting  go.  You  may  not  like  us,  but  you  cannot  get  rid 
of  us.  We  are  to  live  together  eternally,  and  I  think  we 
had  better  try  to  live  quietly.  That  is  about  all  I  want 
to  say.  I  do  not  think  the  Senator  made  out  much  of  a 
case,  first  or  last."  { 

This  was  of  course  not  an  argument  but  virtually  a  repeti 
tion  of  Seward's  assertion  that  all  there  was  left  for  the 
South  was  to  submit  to  such  policy,  just  or  oppressive,  con- 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  36th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  156,  157. 

t  Congressional  Globe >  36th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  p.  819. 

%  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  36th.  Cong.,  ist.  sess.,  p.  157. 


188  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

stitutional  or  unconstitutional,  as  the  government  con 
trolled  by  the  Republicans  might  adopt.  Toombs  had 
already  replied  to  this  repeatedly  in  the  strain  of  his  assertion 
made  in  1856  and  quoted  in  the  early  pages  of  the  present 
chapter:  "I  am  content  that  they  shall  own  us  when  they 
conquer  us,  but  not  before." 

Before  Toombs  spoke  again  on  the  sectional  issue  the 
Democratic  party  met  in  convention  at  Charleston  and 
split  asunder,  in  spite  of  his  efforts  in  the  preceding  months 
to  prevent  it.  Many  Southern  leaders  were  not  content 
with  a  "doorsill"  policy  but  wished  to  hasten  the  culmina 
tion  by  a  sally  into  open  ground.  Led  by  Yancey  and 
Davis  they  courted  an  issue  with  the  Douglas  wing  of  the 
Democrats  by  demanding  that  the  party  incorporate  the  Dred 
Scott  doctrine  of  "non-intervention"  into  its  platform. 
Others  were  chiefly  concerned  with  promoting  the  personal 
ambitions  of  rivals  of  Douglas  for  the  Democratic  nomination. 
Among  these  rivals  were  Buchanan,  Breckinridge,  Jefferson 
Davis,  Hunter  and  Howell  Cobb;  and  the  course  of  Cobb's 
Georgia  friends  was  typical.  Near  the  end  of  November, 
1859,  the  Cobb  supporters  in  the  legislature  summoned  a 
state  convention  of  the  Democratic  party  to  meet  in  Mil- 
ledgeville  on  December  8  to  appoint  delegates  to  the  national 
convention.  The  notice  was  so  short  that  few  counties 
could  take  action,  and  upon  the  assembling  of  the  convention 
the  members  of  the  legislature  from  such  counties  as  had  not 
sent  delegates  were  allowed  informally  to  represent  their 
respective  counties.  This  convention  resolved,  first,  to 
send  delegates  to  Charleston  'and  to  pledge  themselves  to 
support  the  nominee  of  the  Charleston  convention  upon 
condition  that  that  body  should  resolve  to  maintain  the 
equality  of  the  states  and  the  rights  of  the  South  and  the 
principles  of  the  Dred  Scott  opinion.  It  resolved,  second, 
to  present  the  name  of  Howell  Cobb  to  the  Charleston  con 
vention  as  one  worthy  to  fill  the  office  of  President  of  the 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  189 

United  States,  but  to  leave  the  Georgia  delegation  untram- 
meled  in  its  vote  for  a  candidate  except  as  to  the  selection 
of  one  representing  the  principles  indicated  in  the  first 
resolution.  It  then  appointed  a  quota  of  delegates  for  the 
state,  endorsed  Buchanan's  administration,  and  adjourned. 
This  December  convention  violated  no  precedents  by  virtue 
of  its  informality.  But  when  its  proposal  of  Cobb's  name 
was  published  a  chorus  of  protest  arose,  and  the  state  execu 
tive  committee  of  the  party  summoned  a  new  and  more 
regularly  constituted  convention  to  meet  at  Milledgeville 
on  March  14,  1860.  In  the  election  of  delegates  there  were 
heated  contests  in  many  counties  between  the  friends  and 
opponents  of  Cobb;  and  in  the  proceedings  of  the  conven 
tion  the  antagonism  between  Cobb  and  anti-Cobb  factions 
was  pronounced.  The  Cobb  men  elected  A.  R.  Lawton  of 
Savannah  as  presiding  officer  by  172  votes  against  157 
for  Solomon  Cohen  of  Savannah;  but  in  subsequent  pro 
ceedings  the  majorities  were  reversed.  The  wrangling  then 
became  so  bitter  that  the  anti-Cobb  element  withdrew 
temporarily  and  nominated  a  ticket  of  delegates  of  their 
own.  The  whole  convention  then  reassembled  and  agreed 
to  combine  this  ticket  and  the  December  ticket  into  a  single 
delegation  to  Charleston  of  twice  the  usual  number  of  mem 
bers,  instructed  to  vote  as  a  unit.  It  then  rejected  the  resolu 
tions  of  the  December  convention  and  adjourned.*  Stephens 
and  Brown  had  exerted  their  influence  privately  against 
Cobb.  Toombs  appears  to  have  held  hands  off. 

At  Charleston  soon  after  the  convention  assembled  on 
April  23  the  delegates  from  the  Southern  states  held  a 
caucus  and  resolved  to  demand  the  incorporation  of  the 
Dred  Scott  principle  in  the  Democratic  platform,  in  accord 
ance  with  the  resolutions  which  Davis  had  introduced  in  the 
Senate.  Supported  by  the  members  from  California  and 
Oregon,  the  friends  of  this  programme  had  a  majority  in 
*  Southern  Recorder,  March  20,  1860. 


190  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  committee  on  resolutions;  but  the  minority  of  that 
committee  presented  to  the  convention  as  a  separate  report 
a  platform  in  accordance  with  well-known  views  of  Douglas, 
and  after  much  wrangling  the  convention  adopted  the 
Douglas  platform  by  a  vote  of  165  to  138.  Led  by  William 
L.  Yancey  the  delegates  from  all  the  cotton  states  bolted, 
and  the  remainder  of  the  convention,  failing  to  nominate 
a  candidate  under  the  two-thirds  rule,  adjourned  to  meet 
in  Baltimore  on  June  18.  The  bolters  meanwhile  held  a 
convention  of  their  own,  and  after  adopting  a  platform 
adjourned  to  convene  again  at  Richmond  in  June.  In  May 
the  Republican  convention  nominated  Lincoln  and  Hamlin 
and  declared  not  only  that  slavery  did  not  exist  in  the 
territories  but  that  Congress  could  not  legalize  it  in  them; 
and  the  Constitutional  Union  party  nominated  Bell  and 
Everett,  with  the  Federal  Constitution  and  the  enforcement 
of  the  laws  as  the  sole  plank  in  their  platform. 

A  committee  of  Democrats  in  Georgia  promptly  requested 
the  leaders  of  the  party  in  the  state  to  discuss  the  Democratic 
split  and  advise  their  followers  how  to  meet  the  dilemma. 
Their  replies  were  published  in  the  newspapers  throughout 
the  state.*  Stephens  in  his  letter  expressed  regret  that  the 
South  had  forced  the  issue  at  Charleston,  abandoning  its 
former  endorsement  of  non-intervention  and  requiring  new 
pledges  from  the  Northern  Democrats.  He  said  he  relied 
upon  sober  second  thought  to  determine  whether  delegates 
should  be  sent  to  Baltimore  and  what  course  they  should 
adopt.  Herschel  V.  Johnson  recommended  that  the  South 
should  recede  from  its  new  demands,  which  he  said  would 
secure  no  advantage  while  antagonizing  many  Northern 
Democrats.  He  advised  that  delegates  be  sent  to  Baltimore 
instructed  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the  party.  Governor 
Brown  wrote  that  in  his  opinion  the  demand  of  the  South 

*  E.g.  in  the  Federal  Union,  May  22  and  29,  1860;  summarized  in  the 
writer's  Georgia  and  State  Rights,  pp.  189,  190. 


THE    ELECTION    OF    1860  191 

while  just  was  of  doubtful  expediency.  He  was  in  favor 
of  sending  delegates  to  Baltimore.  Howell  Cobb  contented 
himself  with  writing  a  narrative  of  the  recent  developments, 
mentioning  Douglas  as  a  candidate  known  to  be  hostile  to 
the  Southern  contention.  "There  is  one  point  upon  which 
I  trust  Georgia  will  stand  firm,"  said  he,  "and  that  is,  under 
no  circumstances  to  support  Douglas."  Toombs's  letter 
was  the  most  vigorous  of  the  series  in  its  endorsement  of 
what  had  been  done  and  its  advice  against  concessions.  He 
wrote  that  in  the  developments  at  Charleston  he  saw  posi 
tive  evidence  of  the  advance  of  sound  constitutional  prin 
ciples;  that  although  it  might  not  have  been  expedient  to 
present  so  much  truth  on  the  slavery  issue  as  was  contained 
in  the  majority  platform,  it  now  ought  to  be  firmly  supported. 
While  he  approved  the  bolt  of  the  Georgia  delegates,  he 
thought  that  in  view  of  the  overtures  of  the  New  York 
delegation  the  state  should  be  represented  at  Baltimore. 
Such  action  would  involve  no  sacrifice  of  principle,  since 
a  convention  of  the  bolters  could  still  be  held  at  Richmond. 
Disavowing  any  fear  at  the  prospect  of  the  Union's  disrup 
tion,  he  wrote  in  conclusion:  "Our  greatest  danger  today  is 
that  the  Union  will  survive  the  Constitution." 

Toombs  was  thus  driven  by  the  course  of  events  to  aban 
don  his  policy  of  taking  no  part  in  the  public  discussion  of 
the  dispute  within  the  Democratic  party.  Having  declared 
himself  in  his  letter  to  the  Georgia  committee,  he  could  no 
longer  hope  that  continued  silence  on  his  part  in  the  Senate 
would  facilitate  the  closing  of  the  rift.  It  had  been  irksome 
to  him  to  keep  silent  during  the  angry  debates  between 
Douglas  and  the  two  Mississippi  Senators  in  the  preceding 
weeks.  He  now  resolved  to  state  his  views  in  full,  hoping 
that  they  might  prove  sound  and  temperate  enough  and  his 
arguments  cogent  enough  to  reunite  the  party,  or  failing 
this  might  strengthen  the  South  to  meet  the  issue.  He 
accordingly  delivered  in  the  Senate  on  May  21  a  prepared 


192  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

speech  defending  the  Davis  resolutions  of  March  i,  which 
Asserted  the  right  of  citizens  to  emigrate  to  the  territories 
with  their  slave  property  and  denied  the  power  either  of 
Congress  or  a  territorial  legislature  to  interfere  with  that 
right.  The  speech,  delivered  as  a  reply  to  an  attack  by 
Douglas  in  the  preceding  week  upon  the  Davis  resolutions, 
was  an  elaborate  denunciation  of  the  squatter-sovereignty 
doctrine.*  But  to  Toombs's  chagrin  little  was  accomplished 
by  this  speech  beyond  the  placing  of  his  views  fully  upon 
record.  Realizing  now  that  the  Democratic  rift  was  too 
wide  to  be  closed  by  the  efforts  of  himself  or  any  of  his 
colleagues,  Toombs  refrained  from  further  discussion  of  the 
subject  in  the  Senate  during  the  closing  weeks  of  the  session, 
but  devoted  himself  with  even  greater  assiduity  than  usual 
to  the  prevention  of  favoritism  and  fraud  in  the  appropria 
tion  bills. 

When  the  rump  convention  of  the  Democratic  party  finally 
nominated  Douglas  at  Baltimore  and  the  bolting  Democrats 
nominated  Breckinridge  at  Richmond,  Toombs  of  course 
pronounced  himself  a  supporter  of  "Breckinridge  and 
Southern  rights."  Stephens,  on  the  other  hand,  shrinking 
from  the  prospect  of  an  imminent  clash  of  the  sections, 
endorsed  the  Douglas  ticket.  In  the  popular  campaign 
in  the  fall  Stephens  labored  in  Georgia  indefatigably,  though 
with  slight  encouragement,  in  behalf  of  Douglas.  Toombs 
took  the  stump  in  Georgia  and  the  neighboring  states; 
but  realizing  that  his  exertions  could  have  little  effect,  since 
the  real  contest  was  of  Lincoln  against  the  field,  he  gave  his 
most  earnest  thoughts  to  the  problem  which  would  be  pre 
cipitated  in  the  probable  event  of  Lincoln's  victory.  The 
popular  vote  cast  in  Georgia  in  November  was  for  Breckin 
ridge  51,893,  for  Bell  42,855,  for  Douglas  11,580.  No 
Lincoln  electors  had  been  nominated  in  the  state.  In 
nearly  all  the  preceding  presidential  elections  the  candidate 

*  Congressional  Globe  Appendix,  36th.  Cong.,  1st.  sess.,  pp.  338-345. 


THE    ELECTION   OF    1860  193 

carrying  Georgia  had  carried  the  country;  but  now  Lincoln 
received  a  total  of  1,587,610  votes  at  the  polls  throughout 
the  country;  Douglas  i",29i,574;  Breckinridge  850,082; 
and  Bell  646,124.  The  distribution  of  the  vote  was  such 
that  Lincoln  with  but  a  plurality  at  the  polls  secured  a  heavy 
majority  in  the  electoral  college.  Virtually  the  whole  North 
was  carried  by  him,  giving  him  1 80  electoral  votes.  Most 
of  the  South  was  carried  by  Breckinridge,  whose  electoral 
vote  was  72;  Bell  followed  with  39,  mainly  from  the  Southern 
border  states;  and  Douglas,  though  second  at  the  polls, 
was  last  in  the  college  with  twelve. 

The  candidate  of  the  sectional  party  at  the  North  was  thus 
elected;  but  as  has  often  occurred  in  American  elections, 
the  meaning  was  in  a  measure  ambiguous.  A  large  number 
of  Southerners  began  at  once  to  demand  the  immediate 
secession  of  the  Southern  states  as  a  preventive  of  impend 
ing  oppression  at  the  hands  of  the  Republican  administra 
tion.  Others,  including  Stephens,  maintained  that  for  the 
time  being  the  defense  of  Southern  rights  did  not  require 
secession.  Still  others,  with  Toombs  conspicuous  among 
them,  considered  it  necessary  to  sound  the  purpose  of  the 
North  before  determining  irrevocably  the  policy  of  the 
South. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  STROKE  FOR  SOUTHERN  INDEPENDENCE 

THE  value  of  the  Union  had  been  actively  calculated 
from  time  to  time  by  sectional  spokesmen  and  doc 
trinal  propagandists  ever  since  the  achievement  of  Ameri 
can  independence.  Projects  for  its  dissolution  in  remedy 
of  real  or  fancied  oppression  had  been  active  or  latent  in 
the  thought  of  numerous  public  men  in  every  decade.  New 
England  congressmen  in  1793  and  from  1803  to  1814,  and 
abolitionist  agitators  in  the  forties  and  fifties,  were  little  less 
outspoken  in  disunion  advocacy  than  were  the  Southern  nul- 
lifiers  in  the  early  thirties  and  the  "fire-eaters"  in  the  late 
forties  and  the  months  preceding  and  following  Lincoln's 
election.*  Narrow-mindedness  and  devotion  to  parochial 
interests  constantly  hampered  the  maintenance  of  wisdom, 
justice  and  moderation  in  federal  policy.  The  grievances 
of  the  South  were  real  in  each  of  its  ante-bellum  periods  of 
protest,  and  the  partial  failure  of  each  of  its  earlier  campaigns 
for  redress  made  the  crisis  of  1860  all  the  more  acute. 

South  Carolina's  bristling  defiance  in  1832  had  carried 
but  a  temporary  conviction  to  the  majority  interests  that 
the  Union  if  destined  to  be  lasting  and  peaceable  must  dis 
tribute  its  benefits  and  burdens  with  some  degree  of  fairness. 

*  The  narrative  of  these  sectional  struggles  is  related  with  interpreta 
tion  favorable  to  the  North  in  Schouler's,  Von  Hoist's,  McMaster's  and 
Rhodes's  histories  of  the  United  States;  and  with  interpretations  favorable 
to  the  South  in  such  less  known  books  as  W.  C.  Fowler,  The  Sectional  Con 
troversy,  N.  Y.,  1863;  S.  D.  Carpenter,  The  Logic  of  History,  Madison,  Wis., 
1864;  G.  Lunt,  The  Origin  of  the  Late  War,  N.  Y.,  1866;  A.  Harris,  The 
Political  Conflict  in  America,  N.  Y.,  1876. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  195 

In  the  following  decades  the  North  not  only  grasped  regu 
larly  the  lion's  share  of  appropriations,  but  by  means  of 
protective  tariffs  prevented  European  wares  from  competing 
with  those  of  the  North  in  Southern  markets  and  drew 
foreign  laborers  instead  into  the  United  States  to  swell  the 
prosperity  and  voting  strength  of  the  North.  Various  ele 
ments  in  the  Northern  community  in  the  same  period  either 
tolerated  or  encouraged  the  rise  in  their  midst  of  agitations 
sure  to  produce  intense  irritation  in  the  South.  Mr.  W.  C. 
Fowler  has  told  of  a  significant  analysis  of  conditions  by 
Judge  Burnet  of  Cincinnati  about  1850:  "In  repeated 
conversations  he  said  to  me  in  substance:  *  These  states 
cannot  long  hold  together  —  they  will  separate.'  On  my 
replying,  'I  can  hardly  believe  the  Southern  states  will  be 
so  unwise,'  he  answered  'Ah,  my  dear  sir,  the  difficulty  is 
with  Northern  men.  Great  numbers  of  them  do  not  value 
the  Union  so  much  as  they  do  their  doctrines  upon  slavery, 
which  in  their  working  are  hostile  to  the  Union.  A  spirit 
of  disunion  exists  at  the  North  which  will  increase  in  extent 
and  intensity  until  it  has  produced  a  separation  of  the 
states.'"  *  Most  of  the  Northern  sectionalists  however 
failed  to  realize  and  refused  to  concede  the  disunion  tendency 
of  their  policies.  Partly  through  wilful  ignorance  of  South 
ern  conditions  and  purposes,  they  failed  to  see  that  the 
South  had  any  actual  or  prospective  grievances,  and  they 
considered  every  Southern  measure  of  defense  to  be  one 
of  unprovoked  aggression.  They  similarly  refused  to 
believe  before  secession  was  an  accomplished  fact  that  any 
thing  of  earnest  was  contained  in  the  Southern  threats  of 
disunion. 

Many  Southern  thinkers,  on  the  other  hand,  had  acquired 
the  belief  by  1850  that  a  firm  defense,  involving  secession 
if  need  be,  was  necessary  for  Southern  security;  and  by 
1860  great  numbers  of  the  people  had  come  to  endorse  this 

*  W.  C.  Fowler,  The  Sectional  Controversy,  N.  Y.,  1863,  pp.  Ill,  VI. 


196  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

41 

position.  There  was  by  this  time  in  fact  a  very  general 
agreement  that  Southern  interests  and  liberties  were  menaced 
with  tremendous  and  irremediable  injury,  which  ought  to 
be  prevented  by  the  resistance  of  the  whole  community. 
Secession  and  the  erection  of  an  independent  Southern 
nationality  were  widely  contemplated  with  favor  as  a  last 
and  sovereign  remedy. 

The  principal  disagreement  at  the  South  was  as  to  the 
time  and  occasion  proper  for  the  final  resort.  Some  advo 
cated  the  awaiting  of  an  overt  act  of  oppression  by  the 
North-controlled  federal  government;  others  asked  how 
defense  was  possible  with  any  prospect  of  success  after  the 
machinery  of  the  government  should  have  fallen  so  com 
pletely  into  the  hands  of  the  enemies  of  the  South  as  to 
embolden  them  to  an  overt  oppressive  act.  But  virtually 
all  the  Southern  leaders  recognized  that  some  tangible  deed 
of  hostility  shared  in  by  a  great  portion  of  the  North  would 
be  necessary  for  rousing  the  mighty  resolution  of  the  Southern 
populace.  Governor  Brown,  for  example,  who  of  all  the 
public  men  in  Georgia  stood  in  closest  touch  with  the  great 
body  of  the  yeomanry,  considered  himself  instructed  by  the 
Georgia  Platform,  and  stood  ready  in  1858  to  summon  a 
constituent  convention  and  urge  the  people  to  elect  seces 
sionist  delegates  in  case  Congress  should  reject  the  applica 
tion  of  Kansas  for  statehood  under  the  pro-slavery  Lecompton 
constitution.  He  wrote  Stephens  in  that  connection, 
February  9,  1858,  "When  the  Union  ceases  to  protect  our 
equal  rights  it  ceases  to  have  any  charms  for  me." 

The  suspension  of  letter-writing  between  Toombs  and 
Stephens  while  their  policies  were  divergent  during  the 
summer,  fall  and  winter  of  1 860-61  makes  our  knowledge  of 
Toombs's  intimate  thoughts  more  fragmentary  than  usual. 
Yet  there  is  little  occasion  for  being  at  a  loss  regarding  his 
views  at  any  part  of  this  critical  period.  The  key  to  his 
position  appears  in  the  conclusion  of  his  letter  to  Stephens, 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  197 

February  10,  1860,  already  quoted:  "I  shall  consider  our 
ruin  already  accomplished  when  we  submit  to  a  party  whose 
every  principle,  whose  daily  declarations  and  acts  are  an 
open  proclamation  of  war  against  us,  and  the  insidious 
effects  of  whose  policy  I  see  around  me  every  day.  .  .  . 
I  am  now  endeavoring  to  avert  this  calamity  by  and  thro* 
the  aid  of  good  men  in  the  North."  He  was  resolute  against 
submission  to  oppressive  policy  at  the  hands  of  the  Republi 
cans;  but  he  was  not  convinced  by  Lincoln's  election  that 
the  Northern  community  was  irretrievably  controlled  by  the 
anti-slavery  element.  He  thought  that  among  the  majority 
of  the  Republicans  an  ignorance  of  the  spirit  of  apprehension 
and  desperation  prevailing  at  the  South  was  partly  responsi 
ble  for  the  tenure  of  anti-slavery  policies,  and  he  reasoned 
accordingly  that  if  an  absolutely  convincing  demonstration 
could  be  made  that  federal  non-intervention  with  racial 
adjustments  was  a  condition  requisite  to  the  continuance 
of  the  South  in  the  Union,  the  bulk  of  the  Republicans 
might  be  brought  to  repudiate  disturbing  policies  and  grant 
guarantees  of  Southern  security.  In  order  to  make  an 
utterly  convincing  demonstration,  something  different  was 
necessary  from  the  plans  which  had  been  followed  in  the 
previous  crises.  The  ultimatum  of  1850  contained  in  the 
Georgia  Platform  had,  for  example,  proved  ineffective,  and 
the  device  of  a  convention  of  the  Southern  states  as  tried 
at  Nashville  in  the  same  year  had  been  found  of  still  smaller 
avail.  On  the  other  hand  the  actual  adoption  of  an  ordi 
nance  of  secession  by  a  state  acting  by  means  of  a  convention 
would  constitute  an  act,  the  dread  of  which  it  was  hoped 
would  prove  more  salutary  than  the  performance.  Toombs 
desired  negotiations  between  Georgia  and  the  federal  govern 
ment;  but  a  state  convention  was  not  suitably  constituted 
for  negotiation.  He  accordingly  disapproved  the  plans  for 
a  convention  which  became  current  in  the  state  immediately 
after  Lincoln's  election,  and  advocated  instead  that  the 


198  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

legislature  make  a  popular  referendum  of  the  question 
whether  the  state  of  Georgia  were  willing  to  remain  in  the 
Union  under  a  Republican  president  without  an  effective 
guarantee  of  Southern  security.  If  the  majority  of  the 
citizens  should  vote  in  the  negative,  the  referendum  would 
be  understood  to  have  instructed  the  governor  and  legisla 
ture  to  present  an  ultimatum  to  Congress.  In  case  of  the 
rejection  of  this  the  legislature  would  consider  itself  em 
powered  and  instructed  to  effect  the  secession  of  the  state  by 
the  same  process  as  ordinarily  followed  in  the  enactment  of 
laws.  Toombs  thought  that  an  ultimatum  from  a  legisla 
ture  instructed  by  the  people  to  secede  in  case  of  its  rejection 
would  constitute  the  most  powerful  pressure  which  could  be 
brought  upon  the  North.  But  his  plan  was  too  conciliatory 
for  the  ardent  secessionists  in  Georgia  and  too  threatening 
for  adoption  by  the  Unionists. 

The  Georgia  legislature  met  in  1860  at  the  beginning  of 
November  and  was  in  session  at  the  time  of  the  presidential 
election.  As  soon  as  the  result  was  known,  Governor 
Brown  sent  in  a  special  message,  November  7,  giving  the 
unwelcome  news,  reviewing  the  theme  of  Northern  aggres 
sions,  asserting  the  critical  nature  of  the  issue  now  con 
fronting  the  South,  discussing  the  already  mooted  project 
of  a  convention  of  the  Southern  states,  but  advising  against 
it  on  the  ground  of  the  inexpedience  of  delay  in  definite 
action.  He  recommended  that  retaliatory  measures  be 
taken  toward  Northern  states  that  hindered  the  rendition 
of  fugitive  slaves,  that  a  million  dollars  be  appropriated  as 
a  military  fund  to  be  used  in  putting  the  state  at  once  into 
a  condition  of  defense,  and  that  a  state  convention  be 
promptly  summoned  for  authoritative  action  on  the  question 
of  withdrawal  from  the  Union. 

The  people  as  well  as  their  leaders  were  profoundly  stirred. 
In  many  counties  mass  meetings  assembled  and  adopted 
memorials  urging  the  legislature  almost  with  one  accord  to 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  199 

carry  out  the  recommendations  of  the  Governor.  The 
advice  of  leading  citizens  was  in  constant  request,  and  the 
newspapers  were  filled  with  their  responses.  The  legisla 
ture  itself  invited  a  group  of  the  most  thoughtful  public 
men  to  give  their  views  in  addresses  on  successive  nights 
between  the  daily  sessions  of  the  assembly.  Of  the  speeches 
thus  delivered  the  most  important  were  that  of  Thomas 
R.  R.  Cobb  on  the  night  of  November  12,  and  those  of 
Toombs  and  Stephens  on  the  two  nights  following. 

T.  R.  R.  Cobb,  the  younger  brother  of  Howell  Cobb,  was 
a  distinguished  lawyer  and  publicist,  but  now  appeared  vir 
tually  for  the  first  time  as  a  political  speaker.  Fired  by 
a  conviction  that  patriotism  required  Southern  independence, 
he  repented  his  earlier  unionism  and  delivered  a  ringing 
appeal  for  immediate  and  unconditional  secession.  Stephens 
wrote  in  after  years  *  that  the  key-note  of  Cobb's  speech 
was  "We  can  make  better  terms  out  of  the  Union  than  in 
it,"  indicating  that  the  strength  of  Cobb's  argument  lay 
in  an  assertion  of  the  expediency  of  secession  as  a  step  leading 
to  negotiations  for  the  subsequent  re-forming  of  the  Union 
on  a  basis  more  favorable  to  the  interests  of  the  South. 
This  statement  by  Stephens  has  been  accepted  by  later 
writers,  including  the  present  one  in  a  previous  work.  But 
a  scrutiny  of  Cobb's  report  of  this  speech,  prepared  for 
publication  within  three  days  of  its  delivery,f  reveals  noth 
ing  of  the  nature  asserted  by  Stephens.  Cobb  may  possibly 
have  used  the  re-formation  argument  at  some  other  time 
in  the  secession  campaign;  but  the  tone  of  his  speech  before 
the  legislature,  in  his  own  contemporary  report  of  it,  is 
distinctly  in  favor  of  a  permanent  separation  from  the  North. 

*  1870,  A.  H.  Stephens,  War  between  the  States,  II,  321. 

f  Substance  of  remarks  made  by  Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  Esq.,  in  the  Hall  of 
Representatives,  Monday  Evening,  November  12,  1860.  The  speech  is  re 
printed  in  the  Confederate  Records  of  the  State  of  Georgia,  Atlanta,  1909,  I, 
157-182. 


200  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Toombs  spoke  on  the  night  following.  After  sketching 
the  conditions  and  motives  which  had  led  to  the  forming  of 
the  Union  under  the  Constitution,  and  asserting  with  some 
elaboration  that  in  the  conduct  of  the  government  whereas 
the  Southern  statesmen  had  been  consistently  nation-wide 
in  their  patriotism  the  Northern  representatives  had  con 
sistently  sought  and  secured  sectional  advantages  through 
tariffs,  subsidies  and  appropriations,  he  declared  that  since 
the  Missouri  issue  in  1820  a  growing  element  in  the  North 
had  increasingly  added  insult  to  their  injury  of  the  South. 
The  territorial  restriction  of  slavery  and  the  interference  with 
the  rendition  of  fugitive  slaves  by  mob  action  and  state 
legislation  had  been  features  of  a  campaign  leading  to  the 
incendiarism  of  John  Brown's  raid.  "Do  you  not  love 
these  brethren?"  he  exclaimed,  "Oh  what  a  glorious  Union, 
especially  'to  secure  domestic  tranquillity!'"  He  continued: 

"The  time  has  come  to  redress  these  wrongs,  and  avert 
even  greater  evils  of  which  they  are  but  the  signs  and  sym 
bols.  .  .  .  Hitherto  they  have  carried  on  this  warfare  by 
state  action,  by  individual  action,  by  appropriation,  by  the 
incendiary's  torch  and  the  poisoned  bowl.  They  were 
compelled  to  adopt  this  method  because  the  federal  execu 
tive  and  the  federal  judiciary  were  against  them.  They 
will  have  possession  of  the  federal  executive  with  its  vast 
power,  patronage,  prestige  of  legality,  its  army,  its  navy 
and  its  revenue,  on  the  fourth  of  March  next.  Hitherto 
it  has  been  on  the  side  of  the  Constitution  and  right;  after 
the  fourth  of  March  it  will  be  in  the  hands  of  your  enemy. 
Will  you  let  him  have  it?  [Cries  of  no,  no,  never.]  Then 
strike  while  it  is  yet  today.  —  Withdraw  your  sons  from 
the  army,  the  navy  and  every  department  of  the  federal 
public  service.  Keep  your  own  taxes  in  your  own  coffers  — 
buy  arms  with  them  and  throw  the  bloody  spear  into  this 
den  of  incendiaries  and  assassins,  and  let  God  defend  the 
right.  .  .  .  Nothing  but  ruin  will  follow  delay.  The  enemy 
on  the  fourth  of  March  will  entrench  himself  behind  a  quin 
tuple  wall  of  defense:  —  executive  power,  judiciary  (Mr. 
Seward  has  already  proclaimed  its  reformation),  army, 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  201 

navy  and  treasury.  Twenty  years  of  labor  and  toil  and 
taxes  all  expended  upon  preparation  would  not  make  up 
for  the  advantage  your  enemies  would  gain  if  the  rising  sun 
on  the  fifth  of  March  should  find  you  in  the  Union.  Then 
strike,  strike  while  it  is  yet  time." 

After  drawing  an  analogy  between  the  condition  of  Amer 
ica  in  1776  and  that  of  the  South  in  1860,  and  denouncing 
anew  the  tyrannous  purpose  of  the  North,  he  concluded: 

"My  countrymen,  ' if  you  have  nature  in  you,  bear  it  not.' 
Withdraw  yourselves  from  such  a  confederacy;  it  is  your 
right  to  do  so;  your  duty  to  do  so.  I  know  not  why  the 
abolitionists  should  object  to  it,  unless  they  want  to  torture 
you  and  plunder  you.  If  they  resist  this  great  sovereign 
right,  make  another  war  of  independence,  for  that  will  then 
be  the  question;  fight  its  battles  over  again;  reconquer 
liberty  and  independence."  * 

On  the  next  night  Stephens  addressed  the  legislature, 
devoting  himself  largely  to  a  reply  to  Toombs's  speech  and 
to  remarks  which  Toombs,  who  was  sitting  on  the  rostrum, 
interjected  during  the  course  of  Stephens's  argument. 
Stephens  that  night  made  his  celebrated  assertion  that 
secession  was  inexpedient  as  a  redress  for  existing  wrongs 
but  was  a  power  within  the  scope  of  the  state's  rights,  and 
if  Georgia  should  secede  she  would  continue  to  have  his 
allegiance.  As  a  part  of  his  argument  against  secession  he 
eulogized  the  American  system  of  government  and  invited 
its  comparison  with  any  other.  "England,"  interjected 
Toombs.  "England,  my  friend  says,"  continued  Stephens. 
"Well,  that  is  the  next  best  I  grant;  but  I  think  we  have 
unproved  upon  England."  He  then  turned  with  enthusiasm 
to  the  theme  that  the  South  had  greatly  prospered  under  the 

*  Speech  of  Hon.  Robert  Toombs,  delivered  in  Milled geville  on  Tuesday 
evening,  November  15,  1860,  before  the  Legislature  of  Georgia.  Milledgeville, 
Ga.,  1860.  The  speech  was  also  printed  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  1860,  with 
the  erroneous  date  of  December  7  assigned  to  its  delivery.  Copies  of  both 
editions,  which  are  very  scarce,  are  in  the  Library  of  Congress. 


202  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

federal  government.  "In  spite  of  it,"  said  Toombs;  and 
Stephens  made  an  elaborate  rejoinder.  Stephens  con 
ceded,  nevertheless,  that  the  South  had  grievances  demand 
ing  redress,  but  he  advocated  a  Southern  convention  as  the 
most  proper  means  for  securing  it,  and  contended  that  a 
state  convention  was  in  any  event  requisite  for  the  perform 
ance  of  such  a  sovereign  act  as  secession.  "I  am  afraid  of 
conventions,"  Toombs  interjected.  Stephens  replied,  "I 
am  not  afraid  of  any  convention  legally  chosen  by  the  people. 
.  .  .  But  do  not  let  the  question  which  comes  before  the 
people  be  put  to  them  in  the  language  of  my  honorable 
friend  who  addressed  you  last  night,  'Will  you  submit  to 
abolition  rule  or  resist?"  Toombs  broke  in:  "I  do  not  wish 
the  people  to  be  cheated."  Stephens  answered:  "Now, 
my  friends,  how  are  we  going  to  cheat  the  people  by  calling 
on  them  to  elect  delegates  to  a  convention  to  decide  all  these 
questions,  without  any  dictation  or  direction?  ...  I  think 
the  proposition  has  a  considerable  smack  of  unfairness,  not 
to  say  cheat.  He  wishes  us  to  have  no  convention,  but  for 
the  legislature  to  submit  this  question  to  the  people,  'sub 
mission  to  abolition  rule  or  resistance/  Now  who  in 
Georgia  is  going  to  vote  to  submit  to  abolition  rule?" 
"The  convention  will,"  said  Toombs.  "No,  my  friend," 
replied  Stephens,  "Georgia  will  not  do  it.  ...  I  advise  the 
calling  of  a  convention,  with  the  earnest  desire  to  preserve 
the  peace  and  harmony  of  the  state.  I  should  dislike  above 
all  things  to  see  violent  measures  adopted,  or  a  disposition 
to  take  the  sword  in  hand  by  individuals  without  the  author 
ity  of  law.  My  honorable  friend  said  last  night,  'I  ask  you 
to  give  the  sword;  for  if  you  do  not  give  it  to  me,  as  God 
lives,  I  will  take  it  myself."3  "I  will,"  shouted  Toombs, 
and  brought  down  the  house  with  applause.  "I  have  no 
doubt,"  rejoined  Stephens,  "that  my  honorable  friend  feels 
as  he  says.  It  is  only  his  excessive  ardor  that  makes  him 
use  such  an  expression;  but  this  will  pass  off  with  the  excite- 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  203 

ment  of  the  hour.  When  the  people  in  their  majesty  shall 
speak,  I  have  no  doubt  he  will  bow  to  their  will,  whatever 
it  may  be,  upon  the  'sober  second  thought.'"  * 

In  the  report  of  Toombs's  speech  before  the  legislature 
there  appears  no  direct  allusion  to  his  project  of  plebiscite 
instructions  to  the  legislature.  He  had  perhaps  already 
sounded  the  members  and  found  the  bulk  of  them  immova 
bly  convinced  that  the  calling  of  a  convention  was  the  best 
procedure.  The  legislature  in  fact  proceeded  by  unanimous 
vote  to  adopt  an  act,  approved  November  21,  directing  the 
Governor  to  order  an  election  on  January  2,  1861,  of  dele 
gates  to  assemble  in  convention  at  Milledgeville  on  January 
1 6  with  full  power  to  redress  the  grievances  of  the  state. 
In  addition  the  legislature  provided  by  unanimous  vote  for 
the  issue  of  state  bonds  to  the  amount  of  a  million  dollars 
as  a  military  fund,  and  it  authorized  the  Governor  to  accept 
the  services  and  provide  equipment  and  training  for  not 
more  than  ten  thousand  troops  of  the  three  arms,  and  also 
to  furnish  arms  to  volunteer  military  companies  in  the  state 
and  to  encourage  their  organization,  f 

Meanwhile,  in  fulfilment  of  Stephens's  prophecy,  Toombs 
was  growing  milder  in  his  advocacy  of  drastic  measures.  On 
November  14,  the  day  following  his  speech  before  the  legis 
lature,  he  telegraphed  as  follows  to  Mr.  Keitt,  a  leading 
secessionist  of  South  Carolina:  "I  will  sustain  South  Caro 
lina  in  secession.  I  have  announced  to  the  legislature  that 
I  will  not  serve  under  Lincoln.  If  you  have  power  to  act,  act 
at  once.  We  have  bright  prospects  here."  J  But  a  month 
later,  December  13,  he  sounded  a  different  note  when  writ- 

*  Johnston  and  Browne,  Life  of  Stephens,  pp.  367,  564-580;  Cleveland, 
Stephens,  pp.  694-713;  Confederate  Records  of  Georgia,  I,  183-205. 

f  Acts  of  the  Georgia  Assembly,  1860;  U.  B.  Phillips,  Georgia  and  State 
Rights,  pp.  196-198. 

f  Edward  McPherson,  Political  History  of  the  United  States  during  the 
Great  Rebellion,  p.  37. 


204  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT  TOOMBS 

ing  from  his  home  a  widely  discussed  letter  to  a  committee 
of  citizens  of  the  nearby  village  of  Danburg  in  reply  to  their 
invitation  for  him  to  address  them  and  give  them  guidance 
in  the  existing  crisis.  Asserting  that  the  people  of  Georgia 
were  unanimous  upon  the  question  of  their  wrongs  and  in 
their  intention  to  redress  them  through  the  sovereignty  of 
the  state  if  necessary,  he  said  diversity  of  opinion  existed 
only  upon  the  possibility  of  securing  the  redress  of  griev 
ances  within  the  Union  and  upon  the  time  and  circumstances 
most  appropriate  for  an  ultimate  resort  to  secession.  His 
chief  concern  was  with  the  unification  of  sentiment;  and 
to  this  end  he  recommended  that  a  prompt  and  decisive  test 
be  put  to  the  Republican  party  as  to  its  intentions.  He 
wrote : 

"Do  this:  offer  in  Congress  such  amendments  of  the  Con 
stitution  as  will  give  you  full  and  ample  security  for  your 
rights;  then  if  the  Black  Republican  party  will  vote  for  the 
amendments,  or  even  a  majority  in  good  faith,  they  can  be 
easily  carried  through  Congress;  then  I  think  it  would  be 
reasonable  and  fair  to  postpone  final  action  until  the  legis 
latures  of  the  Northern  states  could  be  conveniently  called 
together  for  definite  action  on  the  amendments.  If  they  in 
tend  to  stop  this  war  on  your  rights  and  your  property,  they 
will  adopt  such  amendments  at  once  in  Congress;  if  they 
will  not  do  this,  you  ought  not  to  delay  an  hour  after  the 
fourth  of  March  to  secede  from  the  Union." 

The  unexpectedly  moderate  tone  of  this  letter  attracted 
eager  attention.  A.  H.  Stephens  wrote  to  brother  Linton, 
December  23,  describing  affairs  at  Augusta,  Ga.:  "The 
minute-men  down  there  are  in  a  rage  at  Toombs's  letter. 
They  say  that  he  has  backed  down,  that  they  intend  to  vote 
him  a  tin  sword.  They  call  him  a  traitor.  ...  I  see  that 
some  of  the  secession  papers  have  given  him  a  severe  railing. 
Mr.  H.  says  his  letter  was  the  theme  of  constant  talk  on  the 
cars,  the  fire-eaters  generally  discussing  it,  and  saying  that 
they  never  had  any  confidence  in  him  or  Cobb  either."  In 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  205 

a  letter  of  the  same  day  to  R.  M.  Johnston,  Stephens  ex 
pressed  his  own  opinion  however,  that  the  Danburg  letter 
was  a  master-stroke  of  secessionist  policy,  since  it  enabled 
Toombs  to  secure  the  confidence  of  conservative  men  who 
would  shortly  follow  him  into  secession  upon  the  easily 
foreseen  rejection  by  the  Republicans  of  the  test  which 
Toombs  intended  to  present.* 

Congress  had  begun  its  session  on  December  4;  but 
Toombs  did  not  reach  the  capital  and  take  his  seat  until 
December  19.  In  that  interval  the  sectional  issue  was  pro 
ceeding  apace  toward  a  culmination.  In  the  House  on 
December  6  a  committee  of  thirty-three  was  appointed  to 
consider  the  perilous  state  of  the  country.  By  the  end  of 
the  first  week  of  this  committee's  existence  the  discussions 
and  votes  upon  preliminary  motions  looking  to  Southern 
guarantees  were  such  as  to  convince  many  Southern-rights 
men  at  Washington  that  no  adequate  concessions  could  be 
expected  from  the  Republicans.  Accordingly  a  meeting 
of  Southern  representatives  was  held  on  the  night  of  Decem 
ber  13  at  which  the  following  address  was  framed  and  signed 
by  about  half  of  the  Senators  and  Representatives  from  the 
cotton-belt  states: 

"To  OUR  CONSTITUENTS:  The  argument  is  exhausted. 
All  hope  of  relief  in  the  Union  through  the  agencies  of  com 
mittees,  Congressional  legislation,  or  constitutional  amend-' 
ments,  is  extinguished,  and  we  trust  the  South  will  not  be 
deceived  by  appearances  or  the  pretense  of  new  guarantees. 
The  Republicans  are  resolute  in  the  purpose  to  grant  noth 
ing  that  will  or  ought  to  satisfy  the  South.  We  are  satisfied 
the  honor,  safety  and  independence  of  the  Southern  people 
are  to  be  found  only  in  a  Southern  Confederacy — a  result 
to  be  obtained  only  by  separate  state  secession  —  and  that 
the  sole  and  primary  aim  of  each  slaveholding  state  ought  to 
be  its  speedy  and  absolute  separation  from  an  unnatural  and 
hostile  Union." 

*  Johnston  and  Browne,  Life  of  Stephens,  p.  170. 


206          THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

This  address  was  spread  through  the  South  by  telegrams 
to  the  newspapers  with  the  names  of  the  signers  appended, 
including  Senators  Iverson,  Benjamin,  and  Jefferson  Davis. 
The  name  of  Toombs  was  included  in  the  list  parenthetically 
with  a  statement  of  his  absence  from  Washington  and  an 
assurance  that  he  would  have  signed  the  address  if  he  had 
been  present.*  But  the  publication  of  his  Danburg  letter 
simultaneously  with  the  Southern  Address  give  substantial 
grounds  for  doubting  that  he  would  have  added  his  name 
to  the  list  if  he  had  been  on  hand.  In  fact  it  was  not  until 
much  more  definite  tests  had  been  rejected  by  the  leaders  of 
the  Republican  party  that  Toombs  declared  himself  from 
Washington  to  be  an  unqualified  and  immediate  secessionist. 

In  the  Senate  before  Toombs's  arrival  little  was  accom 
plished  beyond  recriminations  between  Democratic  and 
Republican  members,  until  on  December  18  a  resolution 
offered  by  Mr.  Powell  was  adopted  which  provided  for  a 
committee  of  thirteen  to  consider  the  sectional  grievances 
and  suggest  a  remedy.  Two  days  later  Vice-President 
Breckinridge  named  as  the  committee  Powell  of  Kentucky, 
Hunter  of  Virginia,  Crittenden  of  Kentucky,  Seward  of 
New  York,  Toombs  of  Georgia,  Douglas  of  Illinois,  Collamer 
of  Vermont,  Davis  of  Mississippi,  Wade  of  Ohio,  Bigler  of 
Pennsylvania,  Rice  of  Minnesota,  Doolittle  of  Wisconsin, 
and  Grimes  of  Iowa.  Davis,  who  by  signing  the  Southern 
Address  of  the  previous  week  had  already  declared  his 
belief  that  Southern  grievances  were  beyond  remedy  within 
the  Union,  requested  to  be  relieved  from  service  on  the 
committee  of  thirteen,  but  was  persuaded  by  some  of  his 
Southern  colleagues  to  withdraw  that  request.  Toombs  on 
the  other  hand  accepted  the  appointment  without  reluctance. 
It  gave  him  just  the  opportunity  he  desired  for  testing  the 
purposes  of  the  Republican  party.  Of  the  committee  two 
were  from  the  cotton  states,  three  from  the  border  states 

>  *  McPherson,  Rebellion,  p.   37. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  207 

of  the  South,  three  were  Northern  Democrats,  and  five  were 
Republicans.  All  of  them  were  among  the  most  represen 
tative  and  influential  public  men  of  their  respective  sections 
and  parties.  Any  adjustment  of  the  sectional  issues  which 
the  several  elements  in  this  committee  might  agree  upon 
would  have  a  fair  prospect  of  endorsement  by  the  people; 
and  if  the  committee  should  fail  to  agree  upon  constructive 
plans,  the  problems  of  the  day  might  be  taken  as  insoluble 
within  the  Union. 

On  the  day  of  the  committee's  first  meeting,  which  was 
devoted  to  an  informal  preliminary  discussion,  the  news  of 
South  Carolina's  secession  reached  Washington  and  empha 
sized  the  acuteness  of  the  problem.  On  the  next  day, 
December  22,  the  committee  set  regularly  to  work,  taking 
up  first  a  series  of  resolutions  which  Crittenden  had  presented 
to  the  Senate.  Toombs  and  Davis  gave  notice  at  the  out 
set  that  in  order  to  prevent  the  committee  from  making  a 
report  which  would  have  no  prospect  of  adoption  by  Con 
gress  they  would  cast  their  votes  against  any  resolution 
which  the  Republican  members  should  oppose.  To  remove 
the  necessity  for  this,  however,  the  committee  adopted  a 
salutary  rule  that  no  proposition  should  be  considered 
adopted  unless  it  received  the  votes  of  a  majority  of  each 
of  the  two  groups  in  the  committee:  the  five  Republicans 
and  the  eight  others.  ,  The  official  journal  of  the  committee 
records  that  the  adoption  of  this  rule  was  the  first  business 
transacted  on  December  22.  The  journal  may  possibly  be 
in  error  in  recording  the  adoption  of  this  rule  prior  to  the 
vote  on  the  first  of  Crittenden's  resolutions.  At  any  rate 
Toombs  and  Davis  voted  upon  this  resolution  in  accordance 
with  the  notice  they  had  given,  whereas  in  the  case  of  all 
subsequent  resolutions  which  they  favored  and  the  Repub 
licans  opposed  these  two  spokesmen  of  the  Lower  South 
voted  aye  and  let  the  resolutions  be  defeated  under  the  rule 
by  the  Republican  opposition  alone.  It  is  reported  that  at 


208  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

• 

one  time  while  the  Crittenden  resolutions  as  a  whole  were 
under  discussion  in  the  committee,  "Mr.  Crittenden  said: 
'Mr.  Toombs,  will  this  compromise,  as  a  remedy  for  all 
wrongs  and  apprehensions,  be  acceptable  to  you?*  Mr. 
Toombs  with  great  warmth  replied,  'Not  by  a  good  deal; 
but  my  state  will  accept  it,  and  I  will  follow  my  state/"  * 
Whether  this  colloquy  actually  occurred  or  not,  Toombs's 
attitude  was  just  what  was  indicated  by  the  report. 

The  more  important  of  the  resolutions  in  Crittenden's 
series  aimed  to  secure  the  slaveholding  interest  within  the 
Union  by  guaranteeing  through  constitutional  amendments 
the  legal  prevalence  of  slavery  in  the  territories  south  of 
36°  30'  and  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  by  similarly  guar 
anteeing  the  interstate  slave-trade  and  by  promoting  the 
rendition  of  fugitive  slaves  and  providing  indemnity  for 
the  owners  of  such  as  should  be  rescued  from  their  captors. 
In  rapid  succession  all  these  were  defeated  by  the  Repub 
lican  members,  and  nothing  remained  of  Crittenden's  series 
except  two  unimportant  resolutions  concerning  the  fees  of 
commissioners  in  fugitive-slave  cases  and  concerning  the 
suppression  of  the  African  slave-trade.  Both  of  these 
resolutions  were  intended  as  concessions  by  the  South,  and 
both  were  adopted  by  unanimous  votes.  As  the  next  item 
of  business  Mr.  Doolittle  moved  that  the  laws  should  secure 
to  an  alleged  fugitive  slave  claiming  not  to  be  a  fugitive,  a 
jury  trial  before  he  should  be  delivered  to  the  claimant. 
Mr.  Toombs  moved  to  amend  by  inserting  the  words,  "in 
the  state  from  which  he  fled."  This  amendment  was 
adopted  by  a  vote  of  7  to  5;  but  the  motion  as  amended  was 
then  lost  by  a  vote  of  3  yeas  to  9  nays.  This  ended  the 
day's  work  of  the  committee.  The  Republican  members 
had  rejected  all  the  tests  which  the  leading  advocate  of 
compromise  had  framed  for  them.  The  prospect  for  con 
ciliation  was  blasted. 

*  S.  S.  Cox,  Three  Decades  of  Federal  Legislation,  Providence,  1888,  p.  77.. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  209 

Toombs  that  night  sent  the  following  powerful  telegram 
which  was  published  in  the  Savannah  News  on  Monday, 
December  24,  and  immediately  afterward  circulated  through 
out  the  state: 

"  FELLOW-CITIZENS  OF  GEORGIA:  I  came  here  to  secure 
your  constitutional  rights  or  to  demonstrate  to  you  that  you 
can  get  no  guarantees  for  these  rights  from  your  Northern 
confederates. 

"The  whole  subject  was  referred  to  a  committee  of  thirteen 
in  the  Senate  yesterday.  I  was  appointed  on  the  committee 
and  accepted  the  trust.  I  submitted  propositions,  which 
so  far.  from  receiving  decided  support  from  a  single  member 
of  the  Republican  party  on  the  committee,  were  all  treated 
with  either  derision  or  contempt.  The  vote  was  then  taken 
in  committee  on  the  amendments  to  the  Constitution  pro 
posed  by  Hon.  J.  J.  Crittenden  of  Kentucky,  and  each  and 
all  of  them  were  voted  against,  unanimously,  by  the  Black 
Republican  members  of  the  committee. 

"  In  addition  to  these  facts,  a  majority  of  the  Black  Repub 
lican  members  of  the  committee  declared  distinctly  that 
they  had  no  guarantees  to  offer,  which  was  silently  acquiesced 
in  by  the  other  members. 

"The  Black  Republican  members  of  this  committee  of 
thirteen  are  representative  men  of  their  party  and  section, 
and  to  the  extent  of  my  information,  truly  represent  the 
committee  of  thirty-three  in  the  House,  which  on  Tuesday 
adjourned  for  a  week  without  coming  to  any  vote,  after 
solemnly  pledging  themselves  to  vote  on  all  propositions 
then  before  them  on  that  date. 

"The  committee  is  controlled  by  Black  Republicans,  your 
enemies,  who  only  seek  to  amuse  you  with  delusive  hope 
until  your  election,  in  order  that  you  may  defeat  the  friends 
of  secession.  If  you  are  deceived  by  them,  it  shall  not  be 
my  fault.  I  have  put  the  test  fairly  and  frankly.  It  is 
decisive  against  you;  and  now  I  tell  you  upon  the  faith  of 
a  true  man  that  all  further  looking  to  the  North  for  security 
for  your  constitutional  rights  in  the  Union  ought  to  be 
instantly  abandoned.  It  is  fraught  with  nothing  but  ruin 
to  yourselves  and  your  posterity. 

"  Secession  by  the  fourth  of  March  next  should  be  thundered 


210  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

from  the  ballot-box  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  Georgia  on 
the  second  day  of  January  next.  Such  a  voice  will  be  your 
best  guarantee  for  liberty,  security,  tranquillity,  and  glory." 

Toombs  nevertheless  continued  to  participate  in  the  work 
of  the  committee  of  thirteen.  In  its  session  of  December 
24  after  some  resolutions  by  Seward  proffering  slight  con 
cessions  had  been  disposed  of,  Toombs  in  return  proposed  a 
series  of  resolutions.  He  had  been  willing  to  accept  the 
provisions  of  the  Crittenden  resolutions  as  a  minimum  con 
cession  acceptable  to  the  South.  Now  that  they  had  been 
rejected  he  thought  it  proper  to  deal  no  longer  with  the 
minimum  acceptable,  but  to  present  proposals  of  what  he 
considered  necessary  for  the  full  security  of  Southern  interests 
and  the  lasting  pacification  of  the  Southern  people.  He 
believed  that  the  Republicans  were  so  little  to  be  bound  by 
pledges  that  nothing  short  of  constitutional  guarantees 
could  safeguard  the  South.  He  therefore  proposed  resolu 
tions  looking  to  seven  constitutional  amendments:  i.  that 
every  territory  be  open  to  slaveholders  until  the  time  of 
statehood,  whereupon  the  question  of  slavery  in  the  state 
should  be  determined  by  the  people;  2.  that  slave  property 
be  declared  entitled  to  the  same  protection  as  all  other  prop 
erty  at  the  hands  of  the  United  States  government;  3.  that 
persons  committing  crimes  against  slave  property  in  one 
state  and  fleeing  to  another  be  delivered  up  as  other  criminals; 
4.  that  Congress  pass  laws  for  punishing  persons  in  any  state 
engaged  in  promoting  invasion  or  insurrection  in  any  other 
state;  5.  that  fugitive  slaves  should  not  have  the  benefit 
of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  or  jury  trial;  6.  that  Congress 
be  prohibited  from  passing  any  law  relating  to  slavery  with 
out  the  consent  of  a  majority  of  the  Senators  and  Represen 
tatives  of  the  slaveholding  states;  7.  that  none  of  these 
provisions  or  others  in  the  Constitution  relating  to  slavery 
should  be  subject  to  alteration  without  the  consent  of  all 
the  states  in  which  slavery  should  exist.  These  resolutions 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  211 

were  uniformly  defeated  under  the  rule  of  the  committee 
by  the  adverse  votes  of  the  Republican  members.  The 
committee  held  two  more  sessions,  but  found  it  impossible 
to  adopt  any  important  resolutions.  Accordingly  on  Decem 
ber  28  on  motion  by  Toombs  it  agreed  to  report  to  the 
Senate,  with  its  journal,  the  fact  that  the  committee  had  not 
been  able  to  agree  upon  any  general  plan  of  adjustment.  It 
then  adjourned. 

Toombs's  telegraphic  address  of  December  22  was  of  course 
all  the  more  influential  because  of  its  contrast  with  the  still 
fresh  Danburg  letter.  It  appears  to  have  moved  public 
opinion  in  Georgia  much  more  powerfully  than  the  address 
of  the  Southern  Congressmen  had  done.  A  group  of  citizens 
in  Atlanta,  for  example,  sent  a  telegram  to  Senators  Douglas 
and  Crittenden  at  Washington: 

"Mr.  Toombs's  despatch  of  the  22d.  inst.  unsettled  con 
servatives  here.  Is  there  any  hope  for  Southern  rights  in 
the  Union?  We  are  for  the  Union  of  our  fathers  if  Southern 
rights  can  be  preserved  in  it.  If  not,  we  are  for  secession. 
Can  we  yet  hope  the  Union  will  be  preserved  on  this  prin 
ciple?  You  are  looked  to  in  this  emergency.  Give  us  your 
views  by  despatch  and  oblige." 

Douglas  and  Crittenden  delayed  answering  until  the 
committee  of  thirteen  finished  its  work.  They  then  tele 
graphed  on  December  29: 

"In  reply  to  your  inquiry,  we  have  hopes  that  the  rights 
of  the  South,  and  of  every  state  and  section,  may  be  pro 
tected  within  the  Union.  Don't  give  up  the  ship.  Don't 
despair  of  the  Republic."  * 

Meanwhile  the  people  of  Georgia  were  continuing  to 
voice  their  sentiments  in  resolutions  by  county  massmeetings. 
It  was  as  if  half  a  hundred  choruses  had  joined  in  the  antiph- 
onal  rendering  of  a  mighty  prelude  to  a  battle-piece.  The 

*  McPherson,  Rebellion,  p.  38. 


212  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

major  chord  was  Southern  rights,  of  which  the  strongest 
notes  were  white  supremacy,  Republican  fanaticism,  the 
legitimacy  of  state  secession  and  the  expediency  of  Southern 
independence.  From  the  central  county  of  Spalding  came 
in  a  preamble:  "This  government  is  and  ought  to  be  the 
government  of  the  white  people."  An  echo  with  modula 
tions  was  returned  by  White  county,  hidden  among  the 
mountains  of  the  northern  border  and  remote  from  negro 
population:  "Resolved  .  .  .  That  we  look  with  abhor 
rence  upon  these  acts  [of  the  Republican  party],  and  that  we 
trace  them  to  the  fatal  delusion  which  in  seeking  to  equal 
ize  the  negro  and  white  races  runs  contrary  to  the  will  of 
Providence,  as  is  evidenced  in  the  intellectual  inferiority  of 
the  black  race  and  in  the  common  experience  and  history 
of  mankind."  The  plantation  county  of  Troup  on  the  pros 
perous  western  border  echoed  this  in  turn,  with  another 
added  note:  "We  are  not  warranted  by  experience  or  his 
tory  in  temporizing  with  this  party,  expecting  its  fanat 
icism  to  abate.  Therefore  we  recognize  secession  as  the 
only  adequate  remedy  for  existing  evils."  And  resolutions 
from  Dougherty  county,  in  a  fertile  southwesterly  district, 
declared: 

"We,  a  portion  of  the  citizens  and  planters  of  Dougherty 
county  do,  Resolve,  .  .  .  That  prudence,  reason  and  wis 
dom  dictate  to  us  that  the  most  speedy  and  certain  redress 
for  all  past  and  present  political  grievances,  and  the  most 
sure  guarantee  against  further  aggressions  of  a  similar 
character,  is  immediate  and  independent  secession.  [And 
we  further]  Resolve,  That  while  we  believe  that  each  state 
should  act  for  herself  in  this  matter,  we  would  hail  with 
delight  the  withdrawal  from  the  Union  of  other  Southern 
states,  and  we  would  be  glad  to  have  Georgia  unite  one  or 
more  of  them  in  forming  a  Southern  confederacy." 

Gordon  county  in  the  northwest  asserted,  what  appar 
ently  none  of  her  citizens  denied,  that  Georgia  "came  into 
the  Union  with  the  other  states,  as  a  sovereignty,  and  by 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  213 

virtue  of  that  sovereignty  has  the  right  to  secede  when 
ever  in  her  sovereign  capacity  she  shall  judge  such  a  step 
necessary."  And  the  meeting  in  Richmond  county  on  the 
eastern  border,  assuming  its  legitimacy  to  be  well  enough 
established,  contented  itself  with  resolving  "that  the  only 
redress  is  immediate  secession."  On  the  other  hand  the 
memorial  from  Upson  county,  near  the  middle  of  the  state, 
was  the  most  vehement  of  the  few  which  disapproved 
immediate  and  separate  secession.  It  reads  in  part: 

"We  deprecate  every  movement  that  looks  to  separate  state 
action  on  the  part  of  the  Southern  states  as  fraught  with 
incalculable  mischief  and  the  wildest  confusion,  and  ending  at 
last  in  humiliation,  bankruptcy  and  bloodshed.  In  coop 
eration  alone  is  safety  and  wisdom.  Embarked  in  the  same 
cause  and  identified  with  the  same  institutions,  with  a  com 
mon  foe  in  front  and  a  common  danger  behind,  it  would  be 
monstrous  if  a  single  Southern  state  should  without  consul 
tation  and  by  separate  action,  attempt  to  decide  the  great 
question  that  now  presses  upon  the  South,  not  only  for  her 
self  but  for  her  remaining  fourteen  sister  states  also.  .  .  . 
The  time  has  come  for  the  final  settlement  of  the  slavery 
question  upon  an  enduring  and  unequivocal  basis,  and  to 
a  general  conference  of  the  Southern  states  we  would  entrust 
the  duty  of  declaring  what  that  basis  shall  be." 

An  elaborate  memorial  from  Greene  county  made  an 
unusual  proposal  for  dual  conventions,  one  of  the  Southern 
states  to  frame  demands  and  one  of  the  Northern  states  to 
decide  whether  these  demands  should  be  conceded.  But 
even  should  secession  eventuate,  this  memorial  contended, 
"There  should  be  the  appearance  and  the  reality  of  delib 
eration  and  dignity  in  giving  the  death-blow  to  so  great  a 
republic";  and  the  resolution  concluded:  "Resolved.  That 
in  view  of  the  great  and  solemn  crisis  which  is  upon  us,  we 
request  our  fellow  citizens  to  unite  with  us  in  prayer  to  Al 
mighty  God  that  He  would  deliver  us  from  discord  and  dis 
union,  and  above  all  from  civil  war  and  bloodshed;  and  that 


214  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

He  would  so  guide  our  counsels  and  actions  that  we  may  be 
able  to  maintain  our  rights  without  revolution." 

All  the  memorials  which  alluded  to  the  project  of  arm 
ing  the  state  endorsed  it;  and  finally  the  general  tone  of  all 
the  memorials  save  a  few  which  expressed  the  same  thing 
in  a  more  excited  manner,  accorded  with  a  resolution  from 
Butts  county:  "We  here  today  calmly  and  dispassion 
ately  pledge  our  lives,  our  fortunes  and  our  sacred  honor  to 
the  defense  and  maintenance  of  the  equality  and  sovereignty 
of  Georgia,  whether  in  or  out  of  the  Union."  * 

Unconditional  unionism  was  so  unpopular  in  the  state 
that  its  few  adherents  did  little  campaigning  for  unionism 
as  such,  but  joined  the  ranks  of  the  cooperationists  for  the 
time  being,  with  a  view  to  postponing  secession  and  with 
the  hope  that  delay  and  negotiation  might  bring  a  popular 
realization  of  the  perplexities  and  dangers  of  secession  and 
cause  a  reaction  in  favor  of  the  Union.  But  Stephens,  the 
leading  opponent  of  immediate  secession,  thought  there  was 
little  prospect  of  preventing  the  election  of  a  majority  of 
secessionist  delegates.  The  result  at  the  polls  on  January  2 
justified  his  fears.  Many  of  the  delegates  chosen,  however, 
were  not  definitely  pledged  to  a  programme;  and  it  was 
within  the  range  of  possibility  that  by  debate  in  the  conven 
tion  a  majority  might  be  won  for  cooperation  and  delay. 
Toombs  was  of  course  elected  as  a  delegate  from  Wilkes, 
Stephens  from  Taliaferro,  T.  R.  R.  Cobb  from  Clarke,  and 
nearly  all  the  other  most  distinguished  and  trusted  public 
men  in  the  state  from  their  respective  counties.  Whatever 
might  be  the  action  of  the  convention  it  would  be  the  deci 
sion  of  the  most  capable  body  of  delegates  which  Georgia 
could  produce. 

Meanwhile  events  were  proceeding  rapidly.  South  Caro 
lina,  having  seceded  on  December  20,  promptly  sent  com- 

*  The  whole  collection  of  these  memorials  is  published  in  the  Confed 
erate  Records  of  the  State  of  Georgia,  I,  58-156. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  215 

missioners  to  Washington  to  negotiate  for  the  division  of 
public  property  and  the  national  debt  between  South  Car 
olina  and  the  remaining  states  and  for  the  evacuation  of  the 
forts  in  Charleston  harbor.  South  Carolina  in  the  capacity 
of  an  independent  republic  maintained,  of  course,  that  con 
tinuance  in  keeping  federal  garrisons  within  the  boundaries 
of  the  new  republic  against  its  protests  would  be  an  act  of 
war.  President  Buchanan,  while  procrastinating  as  much 
as  possible,  denied  the  validity  of  secession;  and  Major 
Anderson  commanding  the  little  garrison  in  Charleston  har 
bor  transferred  his  force,  December  26,  from  the  defense 
less  Fort  Moultrie  to  the  somewhat  more  formidable  Fort 
Sumter.  The  South  Carolina  commissioners  demanded  the 
restoration  of  the  former  status  pending  further  negotia 
tions,  but  Buchanan  refused  to  comply.  This  was  taken  by 
the  secessionists  at  large  as  the  giving  of  notice  that  ordi 
nances  of  secession  would  not  be  respected  by  the  federal 
authorities  and  that  the  possession  of  forts  in  the  seceding 
states  must  be  determined  by  force.  In  Georgia,  Fort 
Pulaski,  commanding  the  mouth  of  the  Savannah  river, 
was  occupied  merely  by  a  caretaker.  But  at  the  end  of 
December,  when  the  places  of  the  resigning  Southern  mem 
bers  of  the  cabinet  were  being  filled  by  the  appointment  of 
coercionists,  the  Georgians  at  Washington  considered  the 
garrisoning  of  Pulaski  to  be  imminent.  Accordingly  on 
January  i,  Toombs  sent  the  following  telegram  to  the  True 
Democrat  of  Augusta,  Ga.: 

"The  cabinet  is  broken  up,  Mr.  Floyd,  Secretary  of  War, 
and  Mr.  Thompson,  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  having 
resigned.  Mr.  Holt  of  Kentucky,  our  bitter  foe,  has  been 
made  Secretary  of  War.  Fort  Pulaski  is  in  danger.  The 
Abolitionists  are  defiant." 

In  Savannah  the  same  issue  of  the  Republican  which  pub 
lished  this  despatch  contained  the  following  editorial: 


216          THE    LIFE   OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

"We  have  been  absent  from  our  post,  .  .  .  enjoying  a  short 
respite  from  our  arduous  labors,  and  on  our  return  yester 
day  we  found  the  entire  city  in  commotion  and  laboring 
under  the  intensest  excitement.  Crowds  were  collected  at 
every  corner,  and  pressing  around  the  bulletin  boards  with 
eagerness  to  read  the  latest  news.  This  excitement  was 
created  by  the  despatches  from  Washington  which  will  be 
found  in  our  columns,  and  especially  that  from  Senator 
Toombs  who  stands  as  a  sentinel  upon  the  tower  for  this 
state  at  least,  and  pledges  his  character  and  fame  for  the 
truth  of  his  statements  and  the  soundness  of  his  opinions." 

For  the  preceding  week  the  problem  of  Fort  Pulaski  had 
been  in  active  discussion  throughout  the  state;  and  in 
Savannah  a  project  was  set  on  foot  for  citizens  to  follow  the 
plan  of  the  famous  Boston  Tea  Party  and  seize  the  fort 
without  official  authorization.  Rumors  of  this  carried  Gov 
ernor  Brown  to  Savannah,  where  upon  reading  Toombs's 
telegram  of  January  I,  he  issued  orders,  January  2,  to  Col. 
A.  R.  Lawton  in  local  command  of  the  militia,  directing  him 
to  take  possession  of  the  fort  and  hold  it  in  the  name  of  the 
state.*  The  seizure,  made  accordingly  next  morning,  ap 
pears  to  have  been  applauded  throughout  the  state.  Out 
side  of  Georgia  the  general  stress  of  the  times  was  too  great 
and  stirring  occurrences  too  frequent  for  this  episode  to 
receive  any  special  attention. 

At  Washington  the  two  Houses  continued  the  discussion 
of  the  national  crisis  in  the  intervals  of  routine  business.  In 
the  Senate  Crittenden  was  pleading  anew  for  his  plan  of 
conciliation  through  constitutional  amendments;  but  others 
who  spoke  upon  the  issue  did  little  but  indulge  in  expressions 
of  defiance.  Toombs  upon  learning  of  his  election  as  a  dele 
gate  to  the  Georgia  convention  saw  but  ten  days  more  of 
senatorial  service  ahead  before  his  necessary  departure  for 
Milledgeville.  He  determined  to  make  a  last  formal  pres 
entation  of  his  views  in  such  a  way  that  it  might  possibly 
*  A  very,  History  of  Georgia,  p.  146. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  217 

stimulate  a  quick  adjustment,  or  else  would  serve  as  his 
farewell  address.  He  gave  notice  on  January  3  of  his  desire 
to  speak,  and  at  his  request  ,was  assigned  the  floor  for  Janu 
ary  7.  What  he  then  delivered  proved  to  be  his  farewell 
utterance,  and  it  ranks  easily  as  the  most  powerful  of  the 
series  of  addresses  delivered  by  the  departing  Southern 
Senators.  The  most  salient  feature  of  the  speech  was  the 
formulation  which  it  contained  of  the  demands  of  the 
Southern-rights  champions,  in  whose  behalf  he  accepted 
for  oratorical  effect  the  designation  of  rebels: 

"What  do  these  rebels  demand?  First,  'that  the  people 
of  the  United  States  shall  have  an  equal  right  to  emigrate 
and  settle  in  the  present  or  any  future  acquired  territory, 
with  whatever  property  they  may  possess  (including  slaves), 
and  to  be  securely  protected  in  its  peaceable  enjoyment  until 
such  territory  may  be  admitted  as  a  state  into  the  Union, 
with  or  without  slavery  as  she  may  determine,  on  an  equal 
ity  with  all  existing  states/  .  .  . 

"The  second  proposition  is:  *  that  property  in  slaves  shall 
be  entitled  to  the  same  protection  from  the  government  of 
the  United  States,  in  all  of  its  departments,  everywhere, 
which  the  Constitution  confers  the  power  upon  it  to  extend 
to  any  other  property,  provided  nothing  herein  contained 
shall  be  construed  to  limit  or  restrain  the  right  now  be 
longing  to  every  state  to  prohibit,  abolish,  or  establish  and 
protect  slavery  within  its  limits.'  .  .  . 

"We  demand  in  the  next  place,  'that  persons  committing 
crimes  against  slave  property  in  one  state  and  fleeing  to 
another  shall  be  delivered  up  in  the  same  manner  as  persons 
committing  crimes  against  other  property,  and  that  the  laws 
of  the  state  from  which  such  persons  flee  shall  be  the  test 
of  criminality.'  .  .  . 

"  The  next  stipulation  is  that  fugitive  slaves  shall  be  sur 
rendered  under  the  provisions  of  the  fugitive  slave  act  of 
1850,  without  being  entitled  either  to  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
or  trial  by  jury,  or  other  similar  obstructions  of  legislation, 
in  the  state  to  which  he  may  flee.  .  .  . 

"The  next  demand  made  on  behalf  of  the  South  is,  'that 
Congress  shall  pass  efficient  laws  for  the  punishment  of  all 


218  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

persons  in  any  of  the  states  who  shall  in  any  manner  aid  and 
abet  invasion  or  insurrection  in  any  other  state,  or  commit 
any  other  act  against  the  laws  of  nations  tending  to  disturb 
the  tranquillity  of  the  people  or  government  of  any  other 
state/  .  .  . 

"We  demand  these  five  propositions.  Are  they  not  right? 
Are  they  not  just?  Take  them  in  detail,  and  show  that  they 
are  not  warranted  by  the  Constitution,  by  the  safety  of  our 
people,  by  the  principles  of  eternal  justice.  We  will  pause 
and  consider  them;  but,  mark  me,  we  will  not  let  you  decide 
the  question  for  us.  .  .  ." 

After  a  fresh  arraignment  of  the  Republicans  in  general 
and  Lincoln  in  particular  upon  charges  of  incendiarism, 
tyranny,  and  revolutionary  purpose,  Toombs  concluded 
as  follows: 

"You  will  not  regard  confederate  obligations;  you  will  not 
regard  constitutional  obligations;  you  will  not  regard  your 
oaths.  What,  then,  am  I  to  do?  Am  I  a  freeman?  Is  my 
state,  a  free  state,  to  lie  down  and  submit  because  political 
fossils  raise  the  cry  of  the  glorious  Union  ?  Too  long  already 
have  we  listened  to  this  delusive  song.  We  are  freemen. 
We  have  rights;  I  have  stated  them.  We  have  wrongs;  I 
have  recounted  them.  I  have  demonstrated  that  the  party 
now  coming  into  power  has  declared  us  outlaws  and  is  de 
termined  to  exclude  four  thousand  million  of  our  property 
from  the  common  territories;  that  it  has  declared  us  under 
the  ban  of  the  empire  and  out  of  the  protection  of  the  laws 
of  the  United  States  everywhere.  They  have  refused  to  pro 
tect  us  from  invasion  and  insurrection  by  the  federal  power, 
and  the  Constitution  denies  to  us  in  the  Union  the  right  either 
to  raise  fleets  or  armies  for  our  own  defense.  All  these 
charges  I  have  proven  by  the  record;  and  I  put  them  before 
the  civilized  world,  and  demand  the  judgment  of  today,  of 
tomorrow,  of  distant  ages,  and  of  Heaven  itself,  upon  the 
justice  of  these  causes.  I  am  content,  whatever  it  be,  to 
peril  all  in  so  noble,  so  holy  a  cause.  We  have  appealed, 
time  and  time  again,  for  these  constitutional  rights.  You 
have  refused  them.  We  appeal  again.  Restore  us  these 
rights  as  we  had  them,  as  your  court  adjudges  them  to  be, 
just  as  all  our  people  have  said  they  are;  redress  these  fla- 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  219 

grant  wrongs,  seen  of  all  men,  and  it  will  restore  fraternity, 
and  peace,  and  unity,  to  all  of  us.  Refuse  them,  and  what 
then?  We  shall  then  ask  you,  'Let  us  depart  in  peace/ 
Refuse  that,  and  you  present  us  war.  We  accept  it,  and 
inscribing  upon  our  banners  the  glorious  words  'liberty  and 
equality/  we  will  trust  to  the  blood  of  the  brave  and  the 
God  of  battles  for  security  and  tranquillity."  * 

The  Republican  Senators,  to  whom  this  speech  was 
directed,  received  it  merely  as  a  defiance  and  took  no  steps 
to  prevent  it  from  being  a  farewell  address.  Toombs  con 
tinued  to  occupy  his  seat  in  the  Senate  until  the  end  of  the 
week,  January  12,  witnessing  impatiently  the  tiresome  con 
tinuance  of  the  sectional  wrangling.  He  then  set  out  for 
Georgia  to  aid  in  the  effort  to  create  a  new  and  happier 
nation. 

The  Georgia  convention  assembled  at  Milledgeville, 
January  16,  with  every  delegate  present  but  one  who  was 
mortally  ill.  The  states  of  Mississippi,  Florida  and  Ala 
bama  had  seceded  on  January  9,  10  and  n  respectively, 
and  commissioners  from  South  Carolina  and  Alabama  were 
on  hand  at  Milledgeville  to  persuade  the  Georgia  convention 
to  join  in  the  project  for  a  Southern  Confederacy.  The 
keystone  position  of  Georgia,  together  with  the  well-known 
vigor,  sobriety  and  tenacity  of  her  people  made  her  concur 
rence  a  vital  necessity.  Her  deliberations  in  fact  appear 
to  have  been  watched  with  more  anxiety  than  those  of  any 
other  state  in  the  cotton  belt. 

The  convention  was  quickly  organized  with  George  W. 
Crawford  as  president;  and  on  the  third  day  of  the  session, 
January  18,  Mr.  Nisbet,  a  leading  citizen  of  Macon  and  dele 
gate  from  Bibb  county,  offered  resolutions  committing  the 
convention  to  the  policy  of  secession  and  providing  for  a 
committee  to  draft  the  ordinance.  Ex-Governor  Herschel 
V.  Johnson  offered  as  a  substitute  a  long  series  of  resolutions 

*  Congressional  Globe,  36th.  Cong.,  2d.  sess.,  pp.  267-271. 


220  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

calling  for  a  Southern  convention,  framing  demands  similar 
to  those  which  Toombs  had  made  in  his  farewell  speech, 
and  declaring  that  Georgia  would  secede  unless  the  securi 
ties  demanded  should  be  quickly  established  by  amend 
ments  to  the  United  States  Constitution.  After  an  active 
discussion  by  Nisbet,  Johnson,  T.  R.  R.  Cobb,  Stephens, 
Toombs,  Means,  Reese,  Hill  and  Bartow,  the  convention 
adopted  Nisbet' s  main  resolution  by  a  vote  of  166  to  130, 
and  ordered  the  appointment  of  a  committee  of  seventeen 
to  prepare  an  ordinance.  Nisbet  was  made  chairman  of 
this  committee,  and  Toombs  its  second  member.  On  the 
same  day  a  resolution  offered  by  Toombs  was  unanimously 
adopted  approving  the  capture  of  Fort  Pulaskr  and  direct 
ing  Governor  Brown  to  continue  to  hold  it.  Next  day, 
when  the  committee  of  seventeen  reported  an  ordinance 
withdrawing  Georgia  from  the  Union,  Benjamin  H.  Hill 
moved  the  adoption  of  the  Johnson  resolutions  as  a  substi 
tute.  This  was  defeated  by  133  yeas  to  164  nays,  and  the 
ordinance  was  then  put  upon  its  passage.  Forty-four  dele 
gates  who  had  previously  supported  the  policy  championed 
by  Johnson,  Hill  and  Stephens  now  joined 'the  immediate 
secessionists,  and  the  ordinance  was  adopted  by  208  to  89, 
whereupon  the  president  of  the  convention  announced  that 
it  was  his  privilege  and  pleasure  to  declare  that  the  state  of 
Georgia  was  free,  sovereign  and  independent.  The  news 
spread  rapidly  and  met  with  wild  acclamations  throughout 
the  state.  All  manifestations  of  unionism  promptly  dis 
appeared,  and  public  attention  became  concentrated  upon 
the  task  of  ensuring  the  success  of  Southern  independence. 
The  convention  now  assumed  the  duty  of  providing  for 
the  temporary  performance  of  such  functions  as  had  for 
merly  been  entrusted  to  the  government  of  the  United 
States,  and  of  establishing  connections  outside  of  the  new 
republic  of  Georgia.  Toombs  was  appointed  chairman  of 
the  standing  committee  on  foreign  relations,  January  21. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  221 

Two  days  afterward  he  reported  from  his  committee  a  res 
olution,  promptly  adopted,  that  the  convention  elect  next 
day  two  delegates  from  the  state  at  large  and  one  from 
each  of  the  eight  congressional  districts  to  represent  Georgia 
in  the  convention  of  the  seceded  states  scheduled  to  meet 
at  Montgomery,  February  4.  When  accordingly  the  first 
ballot  was  taken  Toombs  was  found  to  be  elected  unani 
mously  as  delegate  from  the  state  at  large.  Howell  Cobb 
was  elected  on  the  third  ballot  as  his  colleague  at  large, 
and  the  following  were  elected  as  delegates  from  their  sev 
eral  districts:  Francis  S.  Bartow,  Martin  J.  Crawford, 
Eugenius  A.  Nisbet,  Benjamin  H.  Hill,  Augustus  R.  Wright, 
Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  Augustus  H.  Kenan  and  Alexander  H. 
Stephens.  The  election  of  Stephens,  Kenan  and  Hill  illus 
trates  the  tendency  quite  general  in  the  seceding  states  to 
choose  a  portion  of  their  delegates  from  among  the  recent 
opponents  of  immediate  secession,  in  order  to  give  an  air  of 
moderation  and  responsibility  to  the  movement. .  Further 
more,  Toombs  had  particularly  recommended  the  election 
of  Stephens.  Some  who  had  been  vehement  advocates  of 
secession  and  had  hoped  to  be  sent  to  the  Montgomery 
convention  were  mightily  chagrined  at  these  elections,  and 
they  complained  that  the  Milledgeville  convention  had 
usurped  authority  in  choosing  Georgia's  delegation.  The 
action  of  the  convention,  however,  though  perhaps  irregu 
lar,  was  in  accordance  with  the  precedents  of  the  American 
Revolution;  and  the  people  of  Georgia  appear  to  have  been 
quite  content  with  the  men  chosen  to  represent  the  state 
and  with  the  process  followed  in  selecting  them. 

The  principal  further  work  done  by  Toombs  as  a  member 
of  the  Georgia  convention  was  the  drafting  of  an  address  to 
accompany  and  justify  the  ordinance  of  secession.  This 
was  presented  by  Nisbet  from  the  committee  of  seventeen, 
January  29,  with  the  statement  that  Toombs  was  the  author. 
It  was  a  well-reasoned  state  paper>  traversing  ground  which 


222  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

he  had  already  covered  in  his  Senate  speeches.  Its  tone  was 
relatively  moderate,  and  its  arguments  convincing  to  those 
who  were  at  all  disposed  to  be  convinced.  The  address  was 
promptly  adopted  and  ten  thousand  copies  were  ordered 
printed  for  distribution.  On  the  same  day  the  conven 
tion,  having  completed  such  part  of  its  task  as  needed  to 
be  performed  before  the  organization  of  the  Southern  Con 
federacy,  adjourned  subject  to  the  call  of  its  president  for  a 
later  session  at  Savannah. 

The  Montgomery  convention  assembled  February  4,  with 
delegates  present  from  six  seceded  states,  including  Louisi 
ana  whose  convention  had  adopted  its  ordinance  January 
25.  Texas  had  seceded  on  February  i,  but  the  delays  of 
travel  prevented  her  delegates  from  reaching  Montgomery 
until  the  initial  tasks  of  the  convention  had  been  completed. 
Howell  Cobb  was  made  president  of  the  convention,  and  the 
delegates  set  to  work  with  such  vigor  that  within  four  days 
they  had  framed  and  adopted  a  Provisional  Constitution 
for  the  Confederate  States  of  America.  This  was  mod 
eled  roughly  upon  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
but  along  with  other  variations  it  provided  that  the  exist 
ing  convention  should  constitute  the  Congress  of  the  pro 
visional  government  and  should  elect  the  provisional 
President  and  Vice-President.  Although  the  several  delega 
tions  varied  in  size  in  accordance  with  the  numbers  of 
Senators  and  Congressmen  which  the  respective  states 
had  had  at  Washington,  the  prevailing  deference  to  the 
doctrine  of  state  sovereignty  led  to  the  insertion  of  a  clause 
that  each  state  should  have  but  one  vote. 

On  the  same  day  that  the  Provisional  Constitution  was 
adopted,  February  8,  the  Congress  resolved  that  it  would 
proceed  on  the  morrow  to  the  election  of  a  President  and 
Vice-President  of  the  Confederate  States.  Previous  to  this 
time  there  seems  to  have  been  little  or  no  discussion  in 
regard  to  the  presidency*  E.  A.  Pollard,  it  is  true,  relates 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  223 

that  the  Senators  from  the  seceding  states  conspired  in  sup 
port  of  Davis  before  they  left  Washington;  *  but  this  con 
spiracy  probably  existed  only  in  Pollard's  imagination. 
Howell  Cobb,  for  example,  wrote  from  Montgomery  on 
February  6  to  his  wife  regarding  the  presidential  prospect: 
"There  is  no  effort  made  to  put  forward  any  man,  but  all 
seem  to  desire  in  everything  to  do  what  is  best  to  be  done 
to  advance  and  prosper  the  cause  of  our  independence." 
In  the  same  letter  Cobb  wrote:  "I  rather  think  Jeff  Davis 
will  be  the  man,  though  I  have  not  heard  anyone  say  he  is 
for  him."  Stephens,  however,  believed  then  and  afterward 
that  Toombs  was  the  favorite. 

The  procedure  followed  was  such  as  to  facilitate  a  mis 
carriage  of  the  general  will.  Everyone  was  anxious  to  avoid 
discord  or  the  appearance  thereof.  It  was  hoped  that  the 
first  ballot  in  the  Congress  would  result  in  the  unanimous 
election  of  a  President;  and  every  delegation  was  accordingly 
very  sensitive  to  the  real  or  fancied  preference  of  every  other 
one.  Yet  there  was  little  open  canvassing.  Each  dele 
gation  met  in  private  conference  to  determine  the  candidate 
for  whom  it  would  vote;  and  none  of  them  except  that  from 
Georgia  made  official  inquiry  concerning  the  preferences  of 
other  delegations,  but  each  acted  in  the  light  of  such 
information  as  its  members  had  chanced  to  receive.  Under 
such  conditions  if  any  members  of  the  Congress  should  desire 
to  procure  the  election  of  any  candidate,  they  would  be 
strongly  tempted  to  jockey  the  election,  particularly  if 
they  were  members  of  the  Georgia  delegation.  No  con 
temporaneous  writer  except  T.  R.  R.  Cobb  appears  quite 
to  intimate  that  any  jockeying  was  done.  He  attributed 
intrigue  to  the  supporters  of  Stephens;  but  his  account  con 
tradicts  itself  in  regard  to  the  attitude  of  the  majority  in 
the  Georgia  delegation,  and  otherwise  discredits  itself  by 

*  E.  A.  Pollard,  Life  of  Jefferson  Davis,  with  a  Secret  History  of  the  South 
ern  Confederacy,  Atlanta,  Ga.,  [1869],  pp.  97-100. 


224  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

its  display  of  strong  animus.*  The  account  written  by 
Stephens  at  a  somewhat  later  time  appears  to  be  the  best 
available.f  Both  of  these  accounts  agree  that  the  Georgia 
delegation,  a  most  influential  one,  was  faction-split;  and  it 
appears  that  the  majority  of  its  members,  including  partic 
ularly  Stephens  and  Crawford,  were  in  favor  of  Toombs's 
election,  while  a  minority,  including  T.  R.  R.  Cobb  and 
Bartow,  supported  Howell  Cobb.  According  to  Stephens, 
the  delegations  from  South  Carolina,  Florida,  Alabama  and 
Louisiana  were  also  understood  to  be  for  Toombs,  while 
that  from  Mississippi  was  disposed  to  push  Davis  for  the 
chief  command  in  the  army  rather  than  for  the  presidency. 
T.  R.  R.  Cobb  wrote  two  days  after  the  election:  "On  the 
night  the  Constitution  was  adopted  and  an  election  ordered 
for  the  next  day  at  twelve  o'clock  we  had  a  'counting  of 
noses'  and  found  that  Alabama,  Mississippi  and  Florida 
were  in  favor  of  Davis  — Louisiana  and  Georgia  for  Howell, 
South  Carolina  divided  between  Howell  and  Davis,  with 
Memminger  and  Withers  wavering.  Howell  immediately 
announced  his  wish  that  Davis  should  be  unanimously 
elected."  It  seems  very  probable  that  Stephens's  analysis 
of  the  preliminary  alignment  is  the  more  trustworthy. 

All  or  nearly  all  of  the  delegations  except  that  from 
Georgia  held  their  presidential  conferences  on  the  night  of 
February  8,  while  the  conference  of  the  Georgia  delegation 
was  put  off  until  ten  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  the  ninth. 
When  it  then  assembled,  Stephens  proposed  the  nomination 
of  Toombs  for  President,  and  in  reply  to  interrogation 
Toombs  said  he  would  accept  if  the  office  were  cordially 
offered  him.  Thereupon  T.  R.  R.  Cobb  and  Bartow  gave 
the  news  that  the  delegations  from  all  the  other  states  except 
Mississippi  had  held  their  conferences  and  had  resolved  to 

*  Letters  of  T.  R.  R.  Cobb,  Montgomery,  Ala.,  Feb.  6,  7,  8,  9,  10  and  u, 

1861,  to  his  wife.     Southern  History  Association  Publications,  XI,  163-172. 

t  Documents  printed  in  Johnston  and  Browne,  Stephens,  pp.   389-391. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  225 

support  Davis.  Toombs  was  surprised  at  this  and  incred 
ulous.  The  delegation  then  appointed  Crawford  a  committee 
to  ascertain  the  truth  of  the  report.  When  he  returned  with 
its  confirmation  the  Georgians  resolved  to  present  no  candi 
date  for  the  presidency  but  to  propose  Stephens  for  Vice- 
President.  The  Congress  assembled  at  noon  and  Davis 
and  Stephens  were  unanimously  elected.  It  afterwards 
transpired,  according  to  Stephens' s  account,  that  someone 
had  informed  all  the  other  delegations  prior  to  their  confer 
ences  that  the  Georgia  delegation  intended  to  propose  Howell 
Cobb  rather  than  Toombs  for  President;  and  those  dele 
gations,  disapproving  this  choice  but  wishing  to  avoid  the 
friction  which  might  arise  if  they  should  endorse  a  Georgian 
whom  his  colleagues  had  left  aside,  adopted  Davis  instead. 
In  actual  qualifications  for  the  office  Howell  Cobb  was  prob 
ably  not  inferior  to  any  man  in  the  South.  Free  from  the 
repellent  reserve  of  Davis,  the  irritating  over-positiveness  of 
Toombs,  the  disquieting  hostility  to  compromise  of  Yancey, 
the  timidity  of  Hunter  and  the  querulousness  of  Stephens, 
he  was  one  of  the  most  generally  esteemed  public  men  of  his 
time.  That  his  virtues  were  far  from  negative  was  demon 
strated  by  at  least  three  powerful  public  utterances:  his 
public  letter  to  W.  W.  Hull  advocating  the  Clay  compro 
mise  in  1850,  his  address  to  the  people  of  Georgia  advocating 
secession  in  1860,  and  his  "bush-arbor"  speech  at  Atlanta 
opposing  the  Republican  programme  of  reconstruction  in 
1868.  Cobb,  however,  had  been  out  of  Congress  virtually 
ever  since  1851  and  had  had  little  share  in  shaping  the  sec 
tional  issue.  His  name  was  accordingly  not  conspicuous  in 
the  popular  discussion  of  the  Confederate  Presidency,  and 
the  Provisional  Congress  apparently  had  little  serious 
thought  of  electing  him. 

A  tradition  current  in  parts  of  Georgia  runs  to  the  effect 
that  Toombs's  prospects  of  election  as  President  were 
blighted  by  his  intoxication  at  a  banquet  during  the  early 


226  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

sessions  at  Montgomery.  This  may  be  possibly  a  true 
explanation.  It  is  more  probably  the  fruit  of  the  laying  of 
gossips'  heads  together,  attempting  by  conjecture  to  explain 
the  outcome  of  the  election.  Aside  from  the  fact  well  known 
in  the  period  that  in  liquors  what  was  moderation  for  others 
was  excess  for  Toombs,  no  tangible  basis  for  the  rumor 
appears. 

For  weal  or  woe  the  choice  was  made  between  Davis  the 
"army  Senator,"  the  militarist  occasionally  taking  a  hand 
in  popular  problems,  and  Toombs  the  constant  guardian  of 
the  treasury  and  of  citizens'  rights;  between  Davis  the  schol 
arly,  theoretical,  self-contained,  patrician  orator,  and  Toombs 
the  sage,  concrete,  transparently  frank,  democratic  debater; 
between  Davis  the  unapproachable  martinet  and  Toombs 
the  easily  accessible,  vehement  contemner  of  red  tape;  be 
tween  the  neuralgic,  half-invalid  Davis,  and  the  robust, 
leonine  Toombs.  Toombs  had  labored  more  zealously  and 
more  steadily  for  Southern  rights  and  Southern  unity,  and 
had  been  for  years  the  more  popularly  esteemed.  Davis 
had  recently  come  into  public  notice  by  his  warfare  upon 
Douglas,  which  had  split  the  Democratic  party,  against  the 
desire  of  Toombs  to  preserve  its  unity  and  ascendency  in 
the  Union.  The  success  of  this  exploit  by  Davis  in  the 
spring  of  1860  forced  Toombs  to  choose  between  unwelcome 
alternatives  and  to  become  apparently  a  trailer  in  Davis's 
wake.  Thus  Davis  had  for  the  time  being  an  air  of  estab 
lished  leadership  in  the  Lower  South;  and  this  was  prob 
ably  responsible,  along  with  the  bungling  procedure  at 
Montgomery,  for  his  election  as  President.  Both  of  these 
men  were  high-principled,  courageous,  devoted,  and  in  their 
proper  spheres  efficient.  To  vest  each  of  them  with  the 
functions  best  suited  to  his  talents  was  a  paramount  neces 
sity,  and  the  failure  to  accomplish  it  was  a  capital  error. 
While  Davis  would  have  made  without  doubt  an  efficient 
commander  of  a  Confederate  army,  Toombs  would  probably 


SOUTHERN   INDEPENDENCE  227 

have  made  a  far  superior  President  of  the  Confederate 
States.  While  Davis  appears  to  have  aspired  chiefly  to 
military  command  in  the  Southern  service,  Toombs,  through 
never  having  wanted  any  other  administrative  office,  aspired 
to  the  Southern  Presidency  *  His  disappointment  was  none 
the  less  keen  because  unspoken,-  and  it  probably  diminished 
his  self-control,  increased  his  petulance,  and  impaired  his 
subsequent  usefulness  as  a  public  servant.  There  was,  how 
ever,  no  slightest  flagging  in  his  eagerness  to  promote  the 
vindication  of  Southern  independence  in  any  capacity  which 
might  be  assigned  him  and  by  all  the  means  within  his 
command. 

It  appears  that  Davis  realized  that  Toombs  would  be 
most  useful  at  the  head  of  the  Confederate  treasury,  but 
offered  him  the  portfolio  of  state  instead  because  it  was  the 
ranking  position  in  the  cabinet.  In  this  the  President  was 
led  by  punctilio  into  one  of  the  first  of  his  blunders.  He 
himself  had  no  experience  or  talent  in  public  finance,  and 
his  one  chance  to  save  the  government  from  financial  dis 
aster  lay  in  assigning  not  only  the  office  of  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  but  the  full  control  of  fiscal  policy  to  the  ablest 
and  most  influential  financier  available.  Memminger, 
whom  he  appointed,  had  excellent  intentions  but  little  talent 
and  less  influence  upon  Congress.  In  consequence  the 
finances  were  tragically  mismanaged  throughout  the  war, 
speculators  were  fattened  upon  the  public  adversity,  and 
the  invincible  Confederate  army  was  eventually  and  quite 
unnecessarily  starved  into  collapse. 

Toombs  was  reluctant  to  accept  the  proffered  office.  He 
had  been  in  unpleasant  friction  with  Davis  on  several  occa 
sions  in  previous  years,  chiefly  over  questions  of  military 
appropriations  in  Congress.  The  extent  to  which  one  of 
these  went  is  suggested  in  a  letter  of  Toombs  from  Wash 
ington,  Ga.,  March  30,  1857,  to  his  friend  W.  W.  Burwell: 
"I  am  obliged  for  the  kind  interest  you  take  in  my  affair 


228  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

with  Davis.  I  am  glad  it  is  settled,  and  the  mode  is  one 
to  which  from  the  attitude  I  have  held  in  the  matter  I  could 
at  no  time  [have]  objected."  Toombs's  reluctance  to  take 
the  secretaryship  of  state,  however,  may  have  been  entirely 
due  to  his  belief  that  he  was  better  able  and  more  needed 
to  handle  problems  of  finance  than  those  of  diplomacy. 
Yielding  to  Stephens's  persuasion  he  accepted  the  port 
folio  of  state,  taking  the  oath  of  office  on  February  27.  At 
the  same  time  he  retained  his  seat  in  the  Provisional  Con 
gress,  and  throughout  the  spring  he  wrought  indefatigably 
in  the  performance  of  whatever  services  he  could  find  to 
render,  whether  in  official  or  unofficial  capacity. 

The  chief  task  of  the  Congress  in  February  and  early 
March  was  to  frame  a  Permanent  Constitution  for  the  Con 
federate  States.  Toombs  and  T.  R.  R.  Cobb  were  appointed 
as  Georgia's  quota  upon  the  committee  on  the  Permanent 
Constitution,  while  Rhett  of  South  Carolina  was  made  its 
chairman.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  should  be  used  as  a  pattern,  but  many 
proposals  were  made  for  its  modification.  "Tom"  Cobb's 
proposals  were  those  of  a  Sabbatarian  religionist  and  a  foe 
of  the  African  slave-trade;  but  Toombs  was  concerned  with 
ensuring  the  utmost  responsibility  and  efficiency  in  the  gov 
ernment.  He  and  Stephens  and  Howell  Cobb  labored 
earnestly  to  provide  membership  in  Congress  for  cabinet 
members  in  assimilation  as  far  as  possible  of  the  British 
system  of  ministerial  responsibility.  Stephens  claimed  chief 
merit  in  this  connection;  but  Stephens  was  a  chronic  magni 
fier  of  his  own  importance.*  The  purpose  of  the  proposal 
was  virtually  defeated  by  the  adoption  merely  of  a  clause 
providing  that  "Congress  may  by  law  grant  to  the  principal 
officer  in  each  of  the  Executive  departments  a  seat  upon  the 
floor  of  either  House,  with  the  privilege  of  discussing  any 

*  Cf.  his  autobiographical  sketch  in  his  Recollections,  Myrta  L.  Avary 
ed.,  pp.  15-29. 


SOUTHERN    INDEPENDENCE  229 

measures  appertaining  to  his  department."  Had  the  pro 
posed  ministerial  system  been  adopted  Cabinet  and  Congress 
would  probably  have  combined  their  strength  and  have 
given  the  country  the  benefit  of  their  collective  abilities. 
Its  rejection  enabled  President  Davis  to  erect  a  dictatorship 
destructive  alike  to  the  power  of  Cabinet  and  Congress  and 
regardless  of  public  opinion.  The  rest  of  Toombs's  proposals 
were  financial  in  their  bearing,  and  these  were  adopted. 
Some  of  them  forbade  Congress  to  grant  bounties,  or  to  pay 
extra  allowances  to  public  contractors,  or  to  appropriate 
money  for  building  roads  or  canals;  and  another  provided 
that  Congress  should  make  no  general  appropriations 
except  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  both  Houses  unless  the 
expenditure  had  been  recommended  and  estimated  by  a 
member  of  the  Cabinet.*  Toombs  was  probably  the  author 
also  of  the  provision  requiring  that  the  post-office  must  live 
upon  its  own  earnings  after  its  first  two  years  of  operation. 
On  the  other  hand  the  prohibition  of  protective  tariffs,  the 
extension  of  the  President's  term  to  six  years  with  ineligi- 
bility  for  reelection,  and  the  clause  providing  for  amend 
ments  were  proposed  by  Rhett.  The  authorship  of  the 
clause  permitting  the  levy  of  export  duties  appears  not 
to  be  ascertainable.  In  view  of  the  peculiar  nature  and 
resources  of  the  cotton  industry  this  clause  would  have  had 
immense  potentialities  if  the  new  nation  could  have  achieved 
a  peaceful  career.  Many  other  modifications  and  innova 
tions  were  proposed,  some  of  them  radical  in  character;  and 
it  was  feared  for  a  time  by  Toombs,  Stephens  and  other 
moderate  men  that  some  dangerous  provisions  would  be 
incorporated.  The  Constitution  as  framed,  however,  was 
a  thoroughly  sane  document  embodying  remedies  for  nearly 
all  the  defects  which  down  to  that  time  had  been  discovered 

*  J.  L.  M.  Curry,  in  the  Memorial  Volume  of  Howell  Cobb,  S.  Boykin  ed., 
Atlanta,  Ga.,  1870,  p.  265;  Johnston  and  Browne,  Stephens,  p.  393;  Ste 
phens,  War  Between  the  States,  II,  338,  339;  Stovall,  Toombs,  pp.  219,  220. 


230  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  It  was  unani 
mously  adopted  by  the  Congress  on  March  1 1  and  promptly 
ratified  unanimously  by  the  several  states  comprising  the 
Confederacy. 

Meanwhile  military  and  diplomatic  affairs  were  develop 
ing.  The  Provisional  Congress  had  made  initial  provisions 
for  the  raising  of  money,  had  begun  to  take  control  of  the 
military  resources,  and  by  resolutions  had  directed  the 
President  to  take  steps  to  acquire  possession  of  Forts  Sumter 
and  Pickens  and  to  appoint  three  commissioners  to  be  sent 
to  Washington  to  negotiate  a  treaty  of  amity  with  the 
government  of  the  United  States.  Davis  appointed  A.  B. 
Roman,  Martin  J.  Crawford  and  John  Forsyth  on  this 
commission,  February  25.  Toombs  promptly  gave  them 
their  instructions,  and  until  the  end  of  their  mission  at  the 
middle  of  April  kept  in  almost  daily  touch  with  them  by 
letters  and  telegrams.*  The  early  reports  of  these  com 
missioners  led  Toombs  and  his  colleagues  at  Montgomery 
to  hope  for  the  avoidance  of  war.  But  as  weeks  passed 
the  peaceful  prospect  faded,  until  at  length  the  Confederate 
commissioners,  having  never  received  official  recognition  at 
Washington,  were  directed  to  publish  their  correspondence 
with  Secretary  Seward  as  a  vindication  and  return  home. 
The  Confederate  government  also  sent  commissioners  to 
the  European  governments  and  to  Mexico  and  the  West 
Indies.  Toombs  wrote  a  series  of  excellent  state  papers  as 
instructions  to  these  agents,  and  throughout  his  tenure  of 
the  portfolio  of  state  he  held  such  communications  with 
them  as  conditions  would  permit,  f  Toombs  also  of  course 
despatched  and  instructed  commissioners  to  the  several 
states  of  the  Upper  South  whose  governments  and  people 

*  A  number  of  these  are  preserved  among  the  Pickett  papers  in  the 
Library  of  Congress. 

f  Some  of  these  documents  are  published  in  J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages 
and  Papers  of  the  Confederacy,  Nashville,  1905,  II,  1-48. 


SOUTHERN   INDEPENDENCE  231 

were  confronting  the  alternative  of  joining  the  movement 
for  a  Southern  nationality  or  of  clinging  to  the  hope  of  a 
restored  Union  with  the  possible  dread  corollary  of  joining 
in  a  war  of  coercion  against  sister  Southern  states.  But 
before  anything  of  moment  could  be  accomplished  through 
any  of  these  diplomatic  channels  actual  war  intervened. 


CHAPTER  X 
THE    STRESS    OF    WAR 

TO  a  multitude  of  Southerners  in  the  early  months  of 
'61    war   seemed    highly   improbable.     For   example, 
Raphael  Semmes,  afterward  famous  as  the  commander  of 
the  cruiser  Alabama,  wrote  to  Howell  Cobb  near  the  end  of 
January: 

"  I  would  advise  .  .  .  that  both  your  navy  and  army  lists 
be  kept  within  very  small  compass.  I  mean  the  regular 
forces  of  each,  or  such  as  are  to  be  kept  on  foot  in  peace  as 
well  as  in  war.  ...  I  do  not  think  we  shall  have  a  war.  .  .  . 
If  the  border  states  join  you  the  old  confederacy  will  be  split 
nearly  in  half,  and  the  idea  of  coercion  would  be  simply 
ridiculous;  if  they  do  not  join  you,  being  retained  by  com 
promises  that  will  satisfy  them,  they  will  be  a  barrier  and  a 
safeguard  to  you  and  will  hold  the  hands  of  the  Vandals  who 
might  otherwise  be  disposed  to  make  war  upon  you." 

To  another  multitude  war  seemed  to  wear  a  smiling 
countenance.  They  believed  with  enthusiasm  and  exalta 
tion  in  the  justice  of  their  cause  and  in  the  martial  prowess 
of  their  people.  They  commonly  overrated  the  power  of 
"King  Cotton"  and  the  good  will  of  Europe,  and  underrated 
the  combativeness  and  the  vastly  superior  wealth  and  popu 
lation  of  the  North.  The  prospect  of  blockade  most  of  them 
completely  ignored. 

Tradition  relates  that  Toombs  said  in  November  and 
December,  1860,  that  he  would  drink  all  the  blood  that  would 
be  shed  in  a  war  of  Southern  independence.  He  advocated 
vigorous  military  preparations,  however,  as  the  best 
means  of  preventing  war,  and  he  lent  a  hand  wherever  he 


THESTRESSOFWAR  233 

could  in  the  following  months  to  promote  the  organization 
and  equipment  of  a  powerful  volunteer  force.  In  March 
his  optimism  was  probably  sustained  by  the  early  reports 
from  the  Confederate  commissioners  at  Washington,  but 
he  abated  no  efforts  for  preparedness.  For  example,  while 
he  was  in  Savannah  for  a  brief  participation  in  the  adjust 
ment  of  the  Georgia  constitution  to  that  of  the  Confederacy 
and  for  the  closing  of  the  adjourned  session  of  the  conven 
tion,  he  mediated  successfully  between  the  governor  of 
Georgia  and  the  Confederate  military  authorities  and  pro 
cured  the  despatch  of  a  thousand  Georgia  troops  to  join  in 
the  operations  against  Fort  Pickens.*  Early  in  April  the 
tone  of  the  reports  from  Washington  indicated  a  stronger 
prospect  of  war.  The  Confederate  commissioners  notified 
Toombs,  for  example,  on  April  2:  "The  war  wing  presses 
on  the  President:  he  vibrates  to  that  side.  .  .  .  Their  form 
of  notice  to  us  may  be  that  of  the  coward  who  gives  it  when 
he  strikes.  Watch  at  all  points."  f 

The  situation  clearly  called  for  the  firmest  control  by 
those  in  responsible  positions,  for  the  most  delicate  weighing 
of  policies,  and  for  the  most  adroit  diplomacy.  Negotia 
tion,  self-control  and  patience  might  yet  secure  full  recogni 
tion  and  great  prosperity  for  the  new  nation,  while  war 
would  jeopardize  everything,  particularly  if  the  Confederate 
government  should  by  any  deed  rouse  and  unite  the  people 
of  the  North  in  aggressive  resolution.  None  saw  these 
things  more  clearly  than  did  Toombs.  On  the  one  hand,  as 
Roger  Pryor  said  at  Charleston,  the  striking  of  a  blow  would 
bring  Virginia  into  the  Confederacy,  and  other  hesita 
ting  states  along  with  her.  On  the  other  hand  the  main 
tenance  of  peace  would  in  the  long  run  bring  most  of  the 
Southern  border  states  into  the  Confederacy  through  the 
operation  of  the  sentiment  of  kinship  and  of  the  perception 

*  Toombs  to  L.  P.  Walker,  Confederate  Secretary  of  War,  Mch.  21,  1861. 
f  War  of  the  Rebellion  Official  Records,  Ser.  I,  vol.  I,  p.  284. 


234  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

that  by  entering  the  Southern  union  their  people  would  gain 
the  same  advantage  from  the  trade  of  the  cotton  belt  which 
the  people  of  the  North  had  customarily  enjoyed  from  the 
trade  of  the  South.  And  in  the  interim,  so  long  as  the  border 
states  continued  in  the  old  Union,  the  Confederacy  would 
possess  a  strong  group  of  friends  in  the  Federal  Congress. 
It  is  true  that  from  the  necessary  point  of  view  of  the  Con 
federate  government  the  United  States  was  technically 
.,  levying  war  by  holding  military  tenure  of  Forts  Sumter 
and  Pickens;  but  the  Sumter  garrison  could  easily  be  starved 
into  surrender,  and  Pickens  would  in  the  long  run  be  a 
profitless  possession  for  the  United  States.  Toombs  was 
here  as  always  disposed  to  waive  technicalities  for  the  more 
successful  pursuit  of  great  objects.  His  attitude  toward 
the  problem  of  the  forts  was  characteristic  of  him.  He 
advised  that  batteries  be  erected,  that  troops  be  assembled, 
and  all  preparations  made  to  reduce  the  forts  in  the  event 
of  Lincoln's  initiating  hostilities,  but  he  urgently  deprecated 
any  act  of  Confederate  aggression. 

The  question  reached  its  culmination  in  the  Confederate 
Cabinet  meeting  following  the  receipt  on  April  9  of  Lincoln's 
notification  to  the  South  Carolina  authorities  that  he  would 
attempt  to  replenish  the  supplies  of  the  little  Sumter  garri 
son.  Toombs  entered  the  Cabinet  meeting  after  the  dis 
cussion  had  begun.  Upon  learning  the  trend  of  the 
discussion  and  reading  the  telegram  from  Charleston,  he  said: 
"The  firing  on  that  fort  will  inaugurate  a  civil  war  greater 
than  any  the  world  has  yet  seen;  and  I  do  not  feel  competent 
to  advise  you. "  *  While  the  discussion  proceeded  he  paced 
the  floor  with  hands  behind  him  and  head  lowered  in  thought. 
At  length  he  expressed  his  disapproval  of  the  contemplated 
bombardment.  "Mr.  President,"  he  is  reported  to  have 
said,  "at  this  time  it  is  suicide,  murder,  and  will  lose  us 

*  L.  P.  Walker  to  Crawford,  in  S>W.  Crawford,  The  Genesis  of  the  Civil 
War,  N.  Y.,  1887,  p.  421. 


THE    STRESS    OF    WAR  235 

every  friend  at  the  North.  You  will  wantonly  strike  a 
hornets'  nest  which  extends  from  mountains  to  ocean;  and 
legions,  now  quiet,  will  swarm  out  and  sting  us  to  death.  It 
is  unnecessary;  it  puts  us  in  the  wrong;  it  is  fatal."  *  Davis 
however,  decided  in  favor  of  attack,  and  through  Secretary 
Walker  sent  a  telegram  on  the  morning  of  April  10  to  Beaure- 
gard  in  command  of  the  Confederate  forces  at  Charleston 
directing  him  to  demand  the  evacuation  of  the  fort  and  in 
case  of  refusal  to  reduce  it  in  such  manner  as  he  might  deter 
mine.  Major  Anderson  declined  to  evacuate,  but  said  that 
he  would  be  starved  out  in  a  few  days  if  Beauregard  did 
not  batter  him  to  pieces.  Beauregard  telegraphed  this  to 
Montgomery  and  in  reply  on  the  same  day,  April  n,  was 
authorized  to  refrain  from  attack  if  Anderson  would  set  a 
date  for  evacuation  and  pledge  himself  not  to  open  fire  on 
the  Confederates  meanwhile.  Beauregard  sent  notice  of 
this  to  the  fort  shortly  after  midnight  of  April  11-12,  and 
empowered  the  four  aides  who  carried  the  message,  Chest 
nut,  Chisolm,  Pryor  and  Stephen  D.  Lee,  to  determine 
whether  the  reply  to  be  received  were  satisfactory.  Ander 
son  replied  at  3.15  A.  M.,  after  a  council  of  war,  that  he  would 
evacuate  the  fort  by  noon  on  April  15,  and  if  not  attacked 
meanwhile  would  not  fire  upon  the  Confederate  forces,  should 
he  not  receive  controlling  instructions  from  Washington,  or 
additional  supplies.  Beauregard's  aides  peremptorily  rejected 
these  terms  and  notified  Anderson  that  fire  would  be  opened 
upon  him  in  an  hour's  time.  Thus  Davis  delegated  to 
Beauregard  the  decision  as  to  beginning""open  warfare,  and 
Beauregard  delegated  it  to  four  subordinates,  at  least  one 
and  perhaps  all  of  whom  were  advocates  of  war  for  the  sake 
of  its  effect  upon  the  border  states.  During  the  bombard 
ment  which  came  with  daybreak  on  April  12  a  part  of 
Lincoln's  provisioning  fleet  appeared  off  Charleston  harbor; 
but  the  tugs  upon  which  it  depended  for  transferring  supplies 
*  Stovall,  Toombs,  p.  226. 


236  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

to  the  fort  had  been  blown  away  by  a  storm.  In  any  event 
the  fort  could  not  have  been  provisioned  against  the  resist 
ance  of  the  Confederate  batteries.  Accordingly  fire  was 
opened  under  circumstances  which  made  it  seem  to  the 
doubting  element  in  the  North  a  gratuitous  onslaught.  On 
the  one  hand  it  brought  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  Tennessee 
and  Arkansas  into  the  Confederacy;  on  the  other  hand  it 
fulfilled  Toombs's  prophecy  by  stirring  up  the  Northern 
hornets'  nest  to  an  extent  which  could  have  been  accomplished 
in  hardly  any  other  way.  The  Confederacy's  problem  was 
bungled  and  the  war  was  begun  in  the  way  least  favorable 
for  the  South.  Few  were  disposed  to  vain  regrets,  however, 
and  certainly  not  the  indomitable  Toombs.  The  people, 
the  army,  and  the  government,  after  a  brief  rejoicing  over 
Sumter's  downfall,  turned  their  thoughts  to  the  more  formi 
dable  military  problems  of  the  future. 

The  following  weeks  were  crowded  with  salient  events: 
Lincoln's  call  for  volunteers,  Davis's  proclamation  offering 
letters  of  marque,  Lincoln's  proclamation  of  blockade,  the 
secession  of  additional  states,  above  mentioned,  the  transfer 
of  the  Confederate  capital  to  Richmond,  the  Federal  evacua 
tion  of  the  Norfolk  navy  yard  and  the  Harper's  Ferry  arsenal, 
the  uprising  of  Southern  sympathizers  in  Baltimore  and  the 
beginning  of  field  manoeuvres  in  Northern  Virginia.  Toombs 
was  performing  the  routine  duties  of  his  office  and  assisting 
in  the  raising  of  loans  and  the  organization  of  troops.  Yet 
he  could  not  find  outlet  for  his  tremendous  energy,  and  he 
chafed  at  the  limitations  which  his  office  imposed  upon  him. 
As  Secretary  of  State  he  was  merely  the  President's  chief 
clerk  for  the  quite  seldom  diplomatic  correspondence.  He 
could  formulate  and  pursue  no  policies  which  did  not  com 
mend  themselves  to  Davis's  somewhat  capricious  judgment. 
His  heart  was  with  the  army  in  the  field,  and  at  length  when 
the  prospect  of  a  pitched  battle  became  imminent  he  found 
the  restraints  of  his  ornamental  civilian  capacity  unbearable 


THESTRESSOFWAR  237 

and  applied  for  an  appointment  in  the  army.  His  com 
mission  as  brigadier-general  was  issued  on  July  19,  1861. 
Two  days  later,  pending  his  assignment  to  a  command,  the 
battle  of  Manassas  was  fought  and  won;  but  in  spite  of  the 
advice  of  Stonewall  Jackson  and  others,  including  Toombs, 
the  routed  enemy  was  not  pursued. 

Toombs  is  quoted  as  having  said  that  he  carried  the 
archives  of  the  Department  of  State  in  his  own  hat.  There 
appears,  however,  to  have  been  some  work  necessary  to  put 
affairs  in  shape  for  his  successor,  R.  M.  T.  Hunter,  and 
Toombs  did  not  resign  until  July  24.  His  family  and  some 
of  his  friends  were  endeavoring  earnestly  to  dissuade  him 
from  military  service.  His  brother  Gabriel,  for  example, 
wrote  to  Stephens,  July  31,  to  enlist  his  help  in  the  effort 
at  dissuasion.  Deprecating  Toombs's  military  qualifica 
tions  and  his  fitness  to  withstand  the  exposures  of  camp  life, 
he  concluded  with  a  touching  personal  allusion:  "While  I 
am  entirely  independent  of  my  brother  in  the  sense  the  world 
calls  independent,  no  mortal  was  ever  more  dependent  upon 
another  for  happiness  than  I  am  upon  him." 

But  these  appeals  were  fruitless.  Too  many  prominent 
men,  said  Toombs,  were  seeking  bomb-proof  positions,  and 
he  was  resolved  not  to  be  among  them.-  Furthermore,  he 
did  not  wish  to  remain  in  an  administration  whose  policy 
he  could  neither  influence  nor  approve.  Nine-tenths  of  war 
was  business,  said  he,  and  the  business  incapacity  of  the 
government  was  already  becoming  palpable.  It  timidly 
relied  upon  borrowing  rather  than  upon  taxation,  although 
the  people  were  clamoring  to  be  taxed;  it  indolently  neglected 
to  develop  its  financial  resource  in  cotton  while  there  was 
yet  time;  and  it  was  too  frugal  by  far  in  its  purchases  of 
arms,  ammunition  and  ships.  This  deprived  the  Confederacy 
of  military  lasting-power  and  made  a  victorious  outcome  of 
the  war  depend  upon  a  series  of  tours  deforce  at  its  beginning. 
All  available  men  were  immediately  needed  in  the  field  for 


238  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  aggressive  strategy  which  the  financial  passiveness  made 
imperative. 

Toombs  was  in  due  time  put  into  command  of  a  brigade 
comprising  three  Georgia  infantry  regiments,  later  increased 
to  five,  incorporated  in  what  became  LongstreeVs  corps  of 
the  Army  of  Northern  Virginia.  His  sons-in-law  Dudley 
M.  DuBose  and  W.  F.  Alexander  were  among  his  aides,  and 
several  of  his  prominent  long-time  friends,  including  Linton 
Stephens,  were  in  regimental  command.  Indeed  a  large  pro 
portion  of  the  company  captains  and  lieutenants  and  even 
sergeants,  corporals  and  privates  were  among  their  general's 
neighbors  and  personal  friends  in  the  former  peaceful  years. 
The  brigade  was  in  a  sense  a  Middle-Georgia  clan  freshly 
called  to  arms  and  commanded  by  its  own  chief. 

These  recruits  were  far  from  having  the  discipline  of 
regulars;  but  for  aggressive  purposes  under  the  existing 
circumstances  their  abundant  elan  would  have  largely  offset 
their  lack  of  technical  training.  In  this  they  were  typical 
of  the  whole  Confederate  army,  which  was  much  better 
fitted  for  fighting  than  for  waiting.  But  Joseph  E.  Johnston, 
who  was  in  chief  command  in  northern  Virginia,  .was  an 
over-cautious  disciplinarian.  He  kept  the  army  in  camp 
about  Manassas  Junction,  drilling  the  regiments  week  after 
week  and  month  after  month  while  McClellan  was  perform 
ing  similar  work,  but  much  more  vitally  necessary,  w,ith  the 
Federal  forces  about  Washington.  Scores  of  the  Confederate 
officers  of  all  ranks,  and  thousands  of  the  troops  chafed  at 
the  restrictions  of  camp  life  and  fell  ill  from  the  dull  work 
of  daily  drill  under  the  scorching  August  sun  and  from  the 
unsanitary  conditions  prevailing.  Privates,  often  with 
good  reason,  thought  themselves  as  capable  strategists  as 
their  generals,  and  amateur  officers  began  to  look  with  scorn 
at  the  seeming  timidity  of  the  West  Pointers  in  authority. 

Toombs  was  perhaps  the  most  conspicuous  of  the  aggres 
sive  civilian  brigadiers.  For  the  time  being  he  was  on  good 


THESTRESSOFWAR  239 

terms  with  President  Davis,  and  contented  himself  with 
recommending  aggression.  For  example,  he  wrote  from 
Manassas  to  the  President  on  September  I,  saying  that  he 
was  enjoying  camp  life,  studying  tactics  and  finding  it  com 
paratively  reposeful  after  the  activity  of  the  past  six  months. 
He  thought  the  enemy  was  now  weak  and  that  the  Con 
federacy  should  make  vigorous  use  of  its  twelve-months  men 
before  the  time  should  come  for  winter  quarters.  He 
advised  an  invasion  of  Maryland  between  Leesburg  and 
Martinsburg  so  as  to  cut  the  enemy's  connection  with  the 
North  and  cause  Washington  to  fall  without  a  blow,  or  make 
him  fight  on  ground  of  Confederate  choosing.  McClellan's 
negative  policy,  he  thought,  demonstrated  his  weakness. 
Davis  of  course  did  not  see  his  way  clear  to  force  Johnston 
to  carry  out  the  plan  which  Toombs  proposed;  and  Toombs 
soon  began  to  rail  more  or  less  openly  at  Johnston,  Davis 
and  all  West  Pointers,  later  including,  regrettably,  Robert 
E.  Lee. 

According  to  the  prevailing  opinion  among  modern  mili 
tary  critics  the  plan  of  aggressive  action  which  Toombs  was 
advocating  in  the  late  summer  and  fall  of  1861  was  the 
soundest  which  the  Confederacy  could  have  adopted.  And 
his  prophecies  of  inactivity  on  the  part  of  the  Confederate 
commanders  were  but  too  well  justified.  Instead  of  advanc 
ing,  Johnston  fell  back  from  Fairfax  Court  House  to  the 
field  of  Manassas  at  the  middle  of  October,  with  a  view  to 
inviting  McClellan  to  attack  him  in  his  intrenchments  along 
the  line  of  Bull  Run.  But  McClellan,  the  master  pro- 
crastinator,  marched  and  countermarched  and  sighed  for 
bad  weather  to  justify  his  going  into  winter  quarters.  In 
December  he  fell  sick;  and  in  spite  of  excellent  midwinter 
weather,  both  armies  lay  passive  until  March. 

During  the  army's  idle  season  Toombs  went  to  Richmond 
from  time  to  time  to  participate  briefly  in  the  proceedings 
of  the  Provisional  Congress,  of  which  he  was  still  a  member. 


240  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

Repudiating  the  phantasm  of  cotton's  "kingship,"  he 
deplored  and  resisted  the  tendency  toward  cotton  loans, 
produce  taxes,  excessive  issues  of  notes  and  bonds,  and  all 
other  financial  makeshifts.  He  persistently  advocated 
heavy  taxation  as  the  only  possible  means  for  the  equable 
distribution  of  the  burden  of  the  war  and  for  the  mainte 
nance  of  the  government's  credit;  and  he  contended  that 
in  general  the  government  should  refrain  to  the  utmost  from 
disturbing  the  normal  course  of  industry,  commerce  and 
banking.  To  follow  his  plan,  he  maintained,  would  be  to 
promote  the  prosperity  of  the  government  and  the  citizens 
at  the  same  time.  On  the  other  hand,  the  loan  of  unsalable 
cotton  by  the  planters  to  the  government,  he  declared,  would 
be  futile;  and  the  policies  of  issuing  paper  money  in  increas 
ing  quantities,  of  floating  bonds  by  any  and  all  expedients 
conceivable,  of  paternalistic  regulation  of  industry,  and  of 
impressing  army  supplies  at  arbitrary  prices  he  condemned 
as  tending  irretrievably  to  penalize  patriotism,  alienate  the 
good  will  of  the  people,  bankrupt  the  government,  and  pros 
trate  the  army.  The  majority  in  this  Congress  and  its 
successors,  however,  largely  controlled  by  Davis,  persisted 
in  these  temporizing,  irresponsible  and  ruinous  policies. 

When  in  November,  1861,  the  Georgia  legislature  was 
about  to  elect  two  Senators  to  serve  the  state  in  the  first 
Congress  under  the  Permanent  Constitution  of  the  Con 
federacy,  an  anonymous  communication  was  published 
giving  assurance  that  Toombs  would  accept  a  seat  in  the 
Senate  if  elected,  and  urging  that  "this  great  tribune  of  the 
people"  be  not  kept  hidden  "under  a  brigadier's  commission 
away  on  the  frontier  where  his  transcendent  ability  is  of  no 
avail  to  the  country."  *  The  election  was  made  by  joint 
ballot  of  the  two  houses,  November  19.  For  the  first  seat 
Toombs  and  B.  H.  Hill  were  nominated;  and  Hill  was  elected 

*  Card  signed  "Justice,"  in  the  Southern  Federal  Union  (Milledgeville, 
Ga.),  Nov.  19,  1861. 


THE    STRESS    OF   WAR  241 

on  the  first  ballot  by  127  votes  to  68.  On  the  second  call 
for  nomination^  Alfred  Iverson,  James  Jackson  and  John  P. 
King  were  proposed  in  addition  to  Toombs.  For  the  first 
two  ballots  Iverson  led;  but  after  a  noon  recess  Toombs  took 
the  lead,  and  after  the  withdrawal  of  Iverson's  name  at  the 
close  of  the  fifth  ballot  Toombs  was  elected  on  the  sixth  by 
129  votes  to  67  for  Jackson.* 

The  legislature's  reluctance  to  send  Toombs  to  the  Senate 
was  partly  due  to  a  desire  to  avoid  embarrassing  Davis's 
administration  and  partly  to  the  dislike  of  heavy  taxation, 
which  has  been  common  to  all  popular  governments  in  time 
of  great  military  exertions  and  was  as  conspicuous  in  the 
American  Revolution  as  during  the  war  for  Southern  inde 
pendence.  Toombs  had  probably  hoped  to  be  elected  to 
the  Senate  by  a  vote  so  nearly  unanimous  as  to  give  his 
policies  the  support  of  an  enthusiastic  mandate.  Without 
such  endorsement  he  could  hope  to  have  little  influence  as 
compared  with  that  of  the  administration.  Furthermore 
the  lack  of  provision  for  the  publication  of  speeches  and  votes 
in  Congress  would  prevent  the  Senate  from  being  an  adequate 
forum  through  which  to  appeal  to  the  people.  Davis  had 
already  been  elected  as  President,  along  with  Stephens  in 
the  negligible  office  of  Vice-President,  for  the  full  term  of  six 
years  under  the  Permanent  Constitution.  Under  these 
circumstances  the  hope  was  slight  for  successful  opposition 
to  the  Davis  policies  without  crippling  the  government. 
Toombs  of  course  desired  by  all  means  to  invigorate  the 
government  and  stimulate  the  popular  support  of  the  war. 
At  the  same  time  he  still  cherished  the  hope  of  rendering 
distinguished  service  as  a  soldier.  In  spite,  therefore,  of  the 
anonymous  pledge  of  his  acceptance,  he  declined  the  senator- 
ship.  He  suffered  the  tortures  of  Tantalus  in  witnessing 
the  costly  passiveness  of  the  Confederate  government  and 
the  Confederate  army,  seeing  full  well  the  increasing  prospect 
*  Southern  Federal  Union,  Nov.  20,  1861. 


242  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERTTOOMBS 

of  blight  upon  Southern  hopes.  And  not  the  least  of  his 
distresses  arose  from  his  own  compulsory  idleness  and  im 
potence  for  service. 

The  series  of  reverses  which  the  Confederacy  met  from 
November  to  February  at  Port  Royal,  Roanoke  Island,  Fort 
Henry  and  Fort  Donelson,  spurred  Toombs,  M.  J.  Crawford 
and  the  two  Cobbs  to  issue  a  joint  address  to  the  people  of 
Georgia  just  before  the  expiration  of  the  provisional  govern 
ment.^  This  set  forth  the  "unpalatable  facts"  of  the.great 
superiority  of  the  enemy  in  men  and  money  and  the  faint- 
ness  of  the  prospect  of  foreign  intervention,  but  expressed 
confidence  in  the  outcome  if,  as  it  urged,  the  people  would 
unite  in  an  unconquerable  resolution  of  the  most  drastic 
resistance  to  subjugation.* 

The  approach  of  winter's  end  carried  To.ombs  back  to 
his  full  military  routine.  By  this  time  McClellan  had 
assembled  nearly  half  a  million  men  about  Washington  and 
drilled  and  equipped  them  so  well  that  even  he  could  hardly 
find  excuses  for  further  delay;  and  Johnston  prudently  fell 
back  from  Manassas,  March  7,  and  intrenched  himself 
behind  the  Rapidan  and  Rappahannock.  Toombs  wrote 
home  from  Culpeper  describing  the  retreat  and  censuring 
its  policy.  "We  have  got  to  fight  them  somewhere,"  said 
he,  "and  if  I  had  my  way  I  would  fight  them  on  the  first 
inch  of  our  soil  they  invaded,  and  never  cease  to  fight  them 
as  long  as  I  could  rally  men  to  defend  their  homes."  f 

At  the  beginning  of  April  McClellan  ended  the  long  un 
certainty  as  to  the  field  of  operations  by  landing  near  Old 
Point  Comfort  with  an  army  of  one  hundred  thousand  men. 
Johnston  hastened  to  cover  Richmond,  and  then  when 
McClellan  sat  down  to  besiege  Yorktown  instead  of  making 
forced  marches  against  the  capital,  several  Confederate 
brigades  were  sent  down  the  peninsula  to  strengthen  the 

*  Frank  Moore,  ed.,  The  Rebellion  Record,  IV,  192,  193. 
f  Stovall,  Toombs,  pp.  239,  240. 


THE    STRESS    OF    WAR  243 

observation-force  already  there.  Howell  Cobb,  then  recently 
promoted  from  colonel  to  brigadier,  wrote  his  wife  from  camp 
near  Yorktown,  April  15:  "General  Toombs  and  his  com 
mand  arrived  on  the  peninsula  yesterday.  We  have 
Georgians  enough  here  now  to  whip  the  Yankees  if  we  had 
to  do  the  whole  work  ourselves.  But  the  whole  army  is  a 
noble  one  —  as  I  believe,  the  greatest  army  for  its  size  ever 
assembled  on  this  continent." 

But  the  Confederate  commanders  once  more  refrained 
from  battle  and  ordered  a  gradual  retreat  up  the  peninsula 
ahead  of  McClellan.  Toombs's  brigade  grumbled  at  the 
wasting  of  opportunities  for  fighting,  and  Toombs  was  more 
exasperated  than  his  men.*  Of  course  he  had  no  inkling  of 
the  strategy  already  in  preparation  by  Johnston,  Lee  and 
Jackson  which  duly  led  to  McClellan's  rout  and  narrowly 
missed  destroying  his  great  army.  Toombs  had  grown 
morose  from  steady  reflection  upon  the  shortcomings  of  those 
in  civil  and  military  authority,  and  he  was  beginning  to  show 
conspicuously  the  typical  failings  of  the  civilian  officer. 
In  Congress  he  had  been  accustomed  to  argue  with  and 
criticize  his  colleagues,  and  occasionally  to  carry  a  point  by 
dogged  opposition  to  those  in  control.  He  could  not  learn 
that  the  army  was  not  a  debating  society  for  the  brigadiers. 
He  was  so  firmly  convinced  of  the  superlative  value  of  his 
own  ideas  of  grand  strategy  that  he  could  not  refrain  from 
making  himself  obnoxious  by  his  censures  upon  all,  regardless 
of  rank,  who  rejected  his  proposals  or  who  fell  short  of  his 
exalted  requirements  of  aggressiveness  and  efficiency. 

After  two  long  months  of  retreating,  skirmishing  and 
waiting,  Toombs  participated  in  the  tremendous  onslaught 
at  Gaines's  Mill,  June  27,  the  bloody  pursuit  of  the  routed 
McClellan,  and  the  ill-managed  attack  upon  the  Federals 
at  bay  on  Malvern  Hill,  July  I.  But  unfortunately  his 
brigade  was  given  no  work  to  do  but  that  of  the  most  trying 
*  E.g.  letter  to  Stephens,  May  17,  1862. 


244  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

character  and  under  the  most  adverse  conditions.  As  a 
culmination  he  was  ordered  at  Malvern  Hill  to  make  a 
charge,  poorly  supported,  over  six  hundred  yards  of  clear 
ground  against  impregnable  intrenchments  under  terrific 
artillery  fire  from  McClellan's  field-batteries  in  front  and 
his  gunboats  in  the  rear.  D.  H.  Hill  who  with  Magruder 
led  this  charge,  in  imperfect  execution  of  Lee's  injudicious 
command,  said  in  his  official  report,  "It  was  not  war,  it  was 
murder."  *  When  half-way  up  the  long  hill,  Toombs, 
seeing  that  his  brigade  was  unsupported  and  had  begun  to 
straggle  badly,  commanded  his  troops  to  march  obliquely 
to  the  left  and  lie  down  under  such  protection  as  a  con 
venient  rail  fence  afforded.  Shortly  afterward  D.  H.  Hill 
rode  up  to  Toombs,  upbraided  him,  and  ordered  him  forward. 
Toombs  then  resumed  the  advance,  but  his  brigade,  suffer 
ing  heavy  losses,  was  thrown  into  confusion  by  stragglers, 
and  like  the  others  in  the  attack  was  obliged  to  retire  from 
the  hopeless  attempt.  Toombs  thought  that  he  had  been 
gratuitously  insulted  for  attempt  to  save  his  men  from  useless 
slaughter,  and  after  the  battle  he  demanded  satisfaction 
from  Hill.  Hill  refused  to  apologize  and  declined  Toombs's 
challenge  to  a  duel,  and  Toombs  continued  to  nurse  his 
grievances,  f  In  a  letter  to  Stephens  from  camp  near  Rich 
mond,  July  14,  narrating  his  recent  experiences  and  reiterating 
his  resentment  and  disgust,  he  charged  Davis  and  the  regular 
army  with  conspiring  for  the  destruction  of  all  who  would  not 
bend  to  them,  and  he  declared  in  conclusion:  "I  shall  leave 
the  army  the  instant  I  can  do  so  without  dishonor." 

Lee,  who  had  succeeded  to  the  chief  command  after  John 
ston  was  wounded  on  May  31,  soon  began  a  northward 
movement  which  was  to  lead  to  the  battles  of  Second 
Manassas  and  Antietam.  Misfortune  continued  to  pursue 
Toombs  in  the  early  stages  of  this  advance.  For  a  trivial 

*  War  of  the  Rebellion  Official  Records,  Series  I,  vol.  II,  part  2,  p.  629. 
f  The  correspondence  is  published  in  Stovall,  Toombs>  pp.  254-258. 


THE    STRESS    OF    WAR  245 

disobedience  of  orders  when  his  brigade  was  near  the  Rapidan 
Longstreet  ordered  him  under  arrest,*  and  only  granted  his 
release  in  time  for  him  to  reach  his  brigade  while  it  was 
under  fire  at  Manassas.  It  is  said  that  Toombs  then  dashed 
up,  waving  his  hat,  and  shouted,  "Go  it,  boys!  I  am  with 
you  again.  Jeff  Davis  can  make  a  general  but  it  takes  God 
Almighty  to  make  a  soldier."  Longstreet  in  his  report  of 
the  battle  commended  him  for  gallant  action,  f  It  was  at 
Antietam,  however,  that  Toombs  found  at  last  an  oppor 
tunity  for  work  of  conspicuous  merit.  There,  with  two 
skeleton  regiments  totalling  350  men,  he  held  the  stone 
bridge  on  Lee's  right  throughout  the  morning  of  September 
17  against  repeated  heavy  attacks  by  Burnside's  vastly 
greater  force,  until  about  one  o'clock  when,  with  its  flank 
turned  and  its  ammunition  exhausted,  the  little  Confederate 
detachment  was  withdrawn.  During  the  same  afternoon 
Toombs  launched  a  counter-attack  in  another  part  of  the 
field  arid  restored  the  Confederate  alignment  where  it  had 
been  broken  and  disaster  was  imminent.  J  During  a  continu 
ance  of  the  fighting  next  day  his  left  hand  was  shattered  by 
a  rifle-ball;  and  when  Lee  withdrew  his  army  from  Mary 
land  to  resume  the  defensive,  Toombs  went  home  on  leave. 
He  returned  to  his  brigade  in  February,  1863,  at  Fredericks- 
burg,  but  only  to  say  farewell.  He  resigned  his  command 
at  the  beginning  of  March;  and  his  resignation  was  accepted, 
March  4,  although  General  Beauregard  §  and  others  advised 
an  attempt  at  retaining  his  services  by  a  promotion  to  a 
major-generalcy.  On  March  5  Toombs  issued  a  farewell 
address  to  his  brigade,  praising  its  patriotism  and  bravery, 

*  Letter  of  Toombs  to  Stephens,  Aug.  22,  1862;  for  Longstreet' s  account 
see  his  From  Manassas  to  Appomattox,  pp.  161,  166. 

f  Stovall,   Toombs,  p.   261. 

J  James  Longstreet,  From  Manassas  to  Appomattox,  pp.  257-262;  Stov 
all,  Toombs,  pp.  265-268;  War  of  the  Rebellion  Official  Records,  series  I,  vol. 
51,  pp.  161-165. 

§  War  of  the  Rebellion  Official  Records,  series  I,  vol.  14,  p.  826. 


246  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT  TOOMBS 

and  saying  as  regards  himself:  "Under  existing  circum 
stances,  in  my  judgment,  I  could  no  longer  hold  my  com 
mission  under  President  Davis  with  advantage  to  my  country 
or  to  you,  or  with  honor  to  myself." 

It  cannot  be  said  that  Toombs's  retirement  was  a  great 
loss  to  the  army.  On  the  other  hand,  as  he  had  already 
found  to  his  chagrin,  there  was  little  opportunity  in  those 
times  that  tried  men's  souls  for  him  to  render  valuable  ser 
vice  outside  the  military  service.  His  conception  of  the 
proper  function  of  government  was  so  widely  at  variance 
with  the  policies  of  the  Davis  administration  that  he  could 
not  cease  to  make  protests,  even  though  they  were  fore 
doomed  to  be  of  no  avail.  Meanwhile  his  influence  was 
diminishing,  for  while  his  military  career  had  added  nothing 
to  his  prestige,  the  unpopularity  of  some  of  his  economic 
and  financial  doctrines  turned  many  of  his  fellow-citizens 
against  him.  For  his  part  he  was  determined  to  adhere 
uncompromisingly  to  sound  principles,  and  to  publish  his 
views  whenever  he  might  think  fit. 

Vice-President  Stephens  was  irretrievably  alienated  from 
the  Davis  administration  by  its  resort  to  the  conscription 
of  troops  and  by  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus; 
and  Governor  Brown  of  Georgia  was  carried  into  the  opposi 
tion  through  controversies  over  conscription,  the  officering 
of  regiments,  and  the  control  of  state  militia.  Both  of  these 
were  chiefly  concerned  with  the  championship  of  state  rights. 
Brown  was  in  fact  as  much  disposed  toward  paternalism 
on  the  part  of  the  state  of  Georgia  as  Davis  was  on  the  part 
of  the  Confederate  government.  Toombs,  on  the  other 
hand,  while  directing  his  most  vehement  opposition  against 
the  Davis  policies  of  conscripting  troops,  impressing  sup 
plies  and  inflating  the  currency,  warmly  censured  some  of 
Brown's  policies  either  as  unsound  economically  or  as  in 
fringements  upon  individual  liberty.* 

*  Letter  of  Toombs  to  Linton  Stephens,  Dec.  i,  1862. 


THE    STRESS    OF    WAR  247 

A  policy  which  Toombs  was  almost  alone  in  opposing  was 
the  restriction  of  the  cotton  output,  whether  by  law  or  by 
neighborhood  agreement.  He  denounced  this  project  as 
part  of  the  tyrannous  and  irresponsible  programme  of  the 
administration;  and  as  a  means  of  advertising  his  protest 
he  declared  on  all  convenient  occasions  that  he  personally 
would  plant  as  much  cotton  as  pleased  him,  regardless  of 
laws  and  vigilance  committees.  In  June,  1862,  when  a 
committee  in  the  neighborhood  of  his  plantation  demanded 
that  he  reduce  his  cotton  acreage  for  the  year,  he  sent  his 
defiance  in  a  telegram  from  Richmond:  "You  may  rob  me 
in  my  absence,  but  you  cannot  intimidate  me."  * 

In  spite  of  their  considerable  divergence  of  policies,  Brown 
wanted  Toombs  to  succeed  him  in  the  governorship.  He 
wrote  A.  H.  Stephens,  February  16,  1863,  saying  that  if 
Linton  Stephens  would  not  consent  to  be  a  candidate  Toombs 
was  his  next  choice.  Of  the  latter  he  said:  "I  have  the 
highest  confidence  in  his  patriotism,  ability  and  soundness 
upon  the  vital  question  of  state  sovereignty.  I  should  be 
glad  to  know  whether  he  would  consent  to  be  a  candidate." 
A  month  later  he  wrote  again  advocating  the  nomination 
of  Toombs,  but  now  expressing  apprehension  over  the  cotton 
controversy.  He  wrote:  "I  think  it  a  vital  matter  that 
we  look  to  the  production  of  provisions  to  the  exclusion  of 
everything  else.  I  am  satisfied  our  ultimate  success  depends 
on  the  bread  supply.  My  opinion  is  that  Genl.  Toombs's 
cotton  crop  of  last  year  will  be  the  hardest  thing  he  has  to 
carry.  I  am  sure  it  would  be  better  for  him  to  excuse  that 
on  the  ground  of  his  absence  in  the  face  of  the  enemy  and  the 
impertinence  of  the  committee  than  to  justify  the  policy." 

Toombs  declined  this  overture  on  the  ground  that  the 
exigencies  of  war  deprived  state  executives  of  all  important 
functions.  He  was  inclined  to  stand  for  election  instead  to 

*  I.  W.  Avery,  History  of  Georgia,  p.  231;  Southern  Federal  Union,  June 
17,  1862. 


248  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  Confederate  House  or  Senate  in  the  fall.  Brown  eventu 
ally  determined  to  run  for  reelection,  and  was  elected  by  a 
heavy  majority  for  a  fourth  consecutive  term.  His  candidacy 
was  doubtless  materially  aided  by  a  speech  delivered  by 
Toombs  at  Sparta,  Ga.,  June  17,  in  response  to  a  call  from 
the  citizens  for  his  views  on  the  state  of  the  country.  It  was 
inevitable,  said  he,  that  men  should  differ  upon  policies  and 
upon  constitutional  interpretations.  The  people  should 
weigh  the  current  issues  and  decide  them;  the  people  of  the 
South  were  a  unit  upon  the  main  object  in  view,  and  differed 
only  as  to  means  in  reaching  that  end.  As  to  himself,  "his 
country  was  entitled  to  all  that  he  had  and  was,  and,  before 
God,  she  should  have  it  fully,  freely,  unreservedly."-  He 
pronounced  the  conscription  act  unconstitutional  because 
it  did  not  permit  the  states  to  officer  their  militia  as  the 
Constitution  required.  He  condemned  the  Confederate  tax 
in  kind,  saying  it  would  accumulate  stores  at  remote  points 
where  they  would  rot  for  lack  of  transportation  facilities; 
the  government  ought  to  purchase  supplies  at  fair  market 
rates,  and  not  take  corn  and  pay  two  dollars  a  bushel  for  it 
as  it  then  did  when  it  was  bringing  three  dollars  in  the  market. 
He  opposed  the  state  endorsement  of  Confederate  bonds, 
partly  for  the  reason  that  if  Confederate  securities  should 
decline  in  value  to  near  zero  it  would  be  all-important  to 
have  state  credit  preserved  as  an  emergency  resource  for 
carrying  on  the  war.  After  turning  briefly  aside  for  a  glow 
ing  tribute  to  Southern  women  he  concluded  by  denouncing 
the  resort  to  martial  law.  The  independence  of  the  South 
he  declared  worthless  unless  accompanied  by  personal 
liberty.  "I  believe  our  Constitution  to  be  sufficient  for 
peace  or  war.  Preserve  it  unsullied  and  unbroken  in  all 
its  purity,  and  strike  not  for  independence  alone,  but  let 
our  motto  be  independence  and  liberty  'one  and  inseparable, 
now  and  forever/"  * 

*  Confederate  Union  (Milledgeville,  Ga.),  June  30,  1863. 


THE    STRESS    OF    WAR  249 

Much  of  the  spring  and  summer  was  spent  by  Toombs  in 
re-reading  the  works  of  Ricardo,  Bastiat  and  such  other 
economists  as  were  available,  and  scrutinizing  with  increasing 
disapproval  the  Confederate  fiscal  policies.  As  a  fruit  of 
this  he  issued,  August  12,  1863,  a  public  letter  on  the  finances 
of  the  Confederacy,  which  although  it  has  escaped  the  notice 
of  economists  is  wonderfully  in  keeping  with  the  soundest 
modern  doctrines.  His  analysis  was  searching,  his  criticism 
no  less  just  than  merciless,  and  his  recommendations  pre 
sented  probably  the  only  .plans  by  which,  if  by  any  possibility 
at  that  time,  the  Confederacy  could  have  been  saved  from 
financial  collapse.  The  existing  disastrous  depreciation  of 
the  Confederate  currency  and  the  demoralization  of  in 
dustry  and  commerce  he  attributed  in  cogent  phrases  to  the 
twin  policies  of  conducting  a  great  war  without  taxation 
and  of  resorting  to  credit  chiefly  in  the  form  of  paper  money. 
Conditions,  he  thought,  were  still  within  the  reach  of  heroic 
remedies  which  he  prescribed.  These  were  the  instant  and 
absolute  stoppage  of  treasury  notes,  the  levy  of  compre 
hensive  and  rigid  taxation,  and  the  funding  of  outstanding 
notes  into  bonds  with  interest  and  principal  secured  by  the 
mortgaging  of  specific  and  ample  portions  of  the  public 
revenue.  He  concluded:  "We  must  act,  and  that  quickly; 
the  public  interest  and  public  safety  will  no  longer  allow 
delay.  Our  present  system  is  utterly  insupportable;  it  is 
upsetting  the  very  foundations  of  private  rights,  weakening 
daily  public  confidence  in  our  cause  at  home  and  abroad  — 
sowing  dangerous  discontents  among  the  people,  which  are 
daily  deepening  and  widening.  Patriotism  demands  that 
all  good  men  should  unite  to  correct  these  evils."  * 

These  remedies  were  too  drastic  for  their  proposal  to 
serve  with  success  as  a  campaign  platform.  Yet  Toombs's 
sense  of  public  duty  impelled  him  to  use  it  for  that  purpose. 
When  the  legislature  assembled  in  November  he  journeyed 

*  National  Intelligencer)  Aug.   29,   1863. 


250  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

to  Milledgeville  and  announced  his  candidacy  for  the  Con 
federate  Senate  in  a  speech  before  the  two  houses  similar 
in  strain  to  his  public  letter  of  August.  He  was  supported 
by  Brown  and  Stephens;  but  Herschel  V.  Johnson  won  the 
seat.  The  determining  influence  in  the  contest  appears  to 
have  been  exerted  by  B.  H.  Hill  who  was  President  Davis's 
right-hand  man  in  Georgia.  That  it  was  Toombs's  policies 
rather  than  himself  that  the  legislature  rejected  is  indicated 
by  the  fact  that  this  was  the  only  occasion  in  his  career  that 
he  was  defeated  before  the  people  or  the  legislature  of 
Georgia  in  an  avowed  candidacy. 

In  the  following  months  Toombs  of  course  continued  to 
make  acid  remarks  in  his  private  correspondence  and  con 
versation  upon  the  perseverance  of  the  Confederate  govern 
ment  in  its  irresponsible  legislation;  but  his  chief  attention 
was  turned  to  the  drastic  military  necessity  of  defending 
Georgia's  soil  from  invasion.  By  midsummer  of  1863  the 
disasters  of  Gettysburg  and  Vicksburg  and  the  advance  of 
the  Federal  army  under  Rosecrans  into  Chattanooga  had 
persuaded  him  that  he,  along  with  every  other  able-bodied 
man,  was  needed  in  the  army.  He  wrote  Stephens,  July 
14,  1863:  "I  shall  try  to  be  with  the  militia  in  the  prospec 
tive  defense  of  our  homes.  ...  If  we  can  get  up  a  vol- 
[unteer]  reg[iment]  in  this  neighborhood  I  shall  take  its 
command  if  desired;  and  if  not  I  shall  take  such  other  posi 
tion  as  will  enable  me  to  do  the  most  good  with  one  hand." 
This  plan  was  carried  out  in  the  fall.  The  Atlanta  Con 
federacy  in  its  issue  of  October  28  noted  that  Toombs's 
regiment  of  militia  had  been  in  camp  for  several  weeks  in 
the  suburbs  of  Atlanta  and  was  now  ready  to  aid  in  the 
defense  of  the  state.  In  January,  1864,  he  and  his  force,  a 
mixed  body  of  boys  and  old  men  known  officially  as  the 
third  regiment  of  the  Georgia  State  Guard,  formed  part  of 
the  garrison  protecting  Savannah.  Later  when  the  menace 
from  the  mountains  became  greater  than  that  from  the  sea 


THE    STRESS    OF    WAR  251 

the  regiment  was  transferred  to  Atlanta  and  went  into  the 
trenches  to  assist  General  Johnston's  forces  to  defend  the 
city  against  Sherman's  army.  After  the  siege  had  been  laid 
for  some  weeks  Davis  replaced  Johnston  with  Hood  with 
instructions  to  fight.  The  consequent  battles  in  the  latter 
part  of  July  were  defeats  for  the  Confederates,  and  the  siege 
continued.  Toward  the  end  of  August  Sherman  extended 
his  lines  in  a  flanking  movement  south  and  west,  threatening 
to  block  all  lines  of  supply  and  of  egress  for  Hood's  army. 
This  forced  the  evacuation  of  Atlanta  early  in  September. 
Hood  then  moved  into  Tennessee  to  threaten  Sherman's 
communications;  but  his  army  was  soon  destroyed  by 
Thomas  in  the  battle  of  Nashville.  The  Georgia  Guard,  on 
the  other  hand,  stayed  in  front  of  Sherman  as  a  forlorn  obser 
vation-force  to  lessen  in  such  slight  measure  as  it  could  the 
devastation  of  the  country.  At  the  middle  of  November 
Toombs  with  part  of  the  Georgia  Guard  was  at  Macon,  in 
doubt  as  to  the  expediency  of  trying  to  defend  the  town. 
Sherman,  however,  took  the  Milledgeville  route,  leaving 
Macon  on  his  right,  and  proceeded  by  leisurely  marches 
toward  Savannah,  laying  waste  the  country  as  he  went. 
Toward  the  end  of  November  Toombs  led  a  brigade  of  the 
Guard  in  a  route  parallel  to  Sherman's  line  of  march,  skirmish 
ing  with  his  foraging  parties  from  time  to  time,  and  reached 
Savannah  ahead  of  Sherman.  But  finding  the  defense  of 
the  city  hopeless,  the  Confederates  evacuated  it,  December 
19,  to  let  it  fall  a  "Christmas  present"  for  Sherman. 

Toombs  then  went  home  on  sick  leave.  He  recovered 
his  health  in  the  spring;  but  while  he  was  still  making  caustic 
comments  upon  the  administration  and  awaiting  some  new 
opportunity  in  which  he  might  give  aid  in  the  forlorn  cause 
of  Southern  independence,  the  Confederacy  collapsed. 


CHAPTER  XI 

AN  UNRECONSTRUCTED  GEORGIAN 

FOR  some  obscure  reason  the  village  of  Washington  was 
selected  after  the  evacuation  of  Richmond  as  the  last 
civil  and  military  headquarters  of  the  expiring  Confederate 
government.  The  town  had  but  a  single  railroad  approach, 
a  spur  of  the  Georgia  Railroad  whose  main  line  lay  eighteen 
miles  southward;  but  its  difficulty  of  access  by  rail  may 
have  been  a  recommendation  for  the  purpose  at  hand. 

Toombs,  except  for  brief  trips  for  consultation  and  inquiry, 
appears  to  have  staid  at  home  for  a  month  after  Lee's  sur 
render,  waiting  in  the  common  anxiety  to  learn  what  policy 
toward  the  South  the  United  States  authorities  would  adopt. 
His  personal  frame  of  mind  may  better  be  imagined  than 
described.  The  conditions  and  events  in  the  town,  however,, 
have  been  depicted  in  the  charmingly  written  diary  *  of 
Eliza,  the  sprightly  young  "rebel"  daughter  of  the  leading 
Unionist  citizen  of  the  town,  Judge  Garnett  Andrews.  The 
diarist  recorded  under  date  of  April  24: 

"The  shattered  remains  of  Lee's  army  are  beginning  to 
arrive.  There  is  an  endless  stream  passing  between  the 
transportation  office  and  the  depot,  and  the  trains  are  going 
and  coming  at  all  hours.  The  soldiers  bring  all  sorts  of 
rumors  and  keep  us  stirred  up  in  a  state  of  never-ending 
excitement." 

Next  day  she  continued: 

"The  square  is  so  crowded  with  soldiers  and  government 
wagons  that  it  is  not  easy  to  make  one's  way  through  it. 

*  Eliza  F.  Andrews,  The  War-time  Journal  of  a  Georgia  Girl,  N.  Y.,  1908, 
Chaps.  IV,  V.  (Copyrighted  by  D.  Appleton  &  Co.) 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN      253 

It  is  especially  difficult  around  the  government  offices,  where 
the  poor,  ragged,  starved  and  dirty  remnants  of  Lee's  heroic 
army  are  gathered  day  and  night.  .  .  .  Little  Washington 
is  now  perhaps  the  most  important  military  post  in  our 
poor  doomed  Confederacy.  The  naval  and  medical  depart 
ments  have  been  moved  here  —  what  is  left  of  them.  Soon 
all  this  will  give  place  to  Yankee  barracks,  and  our  dear  old 
Confederate  gray  will  be  seen  no  more.  The  men  are  all 
talking  about  going  to  Mexico  and  Brazil;  if  all  emigrate 
who  say  they  are  going  to,  we  shall  have  a  nation  made  up 
of  women,  negroes  and  Yankees." 

On  April  29  she  noted  the  presence  of  "Judge  Crump,  .  .  . 
Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  or  something  of  that 
sort,  .  .  .  wandering  about  the  country  with  his  barren 
exchequer,  trying  to  protect  what  is  left  of  it  for  the  pay 
ment  of  Confederate  soldiers."  Mrs.  Jefferson  Davis 
reached  the  town  on  April  30;  and  on  May  3,  "about  noon 
the  town  was  thrown  into  the  wildest  excitement  by  the 
arrival  of  President  Davis."  Among  cabinet  officials  in  the 
town,  Postmaster-General  Reagan  was  a  guest  at  the  Toombs 
residence,  and  carried  to  Davis  a  message  from  Toombs 
proffering  both  money  and  personal  services  for  securing  the 
fugitive  President's  safety  in  further  flight.  After  receiving 
callers  throughout  the  day  of  May  4,  Davis  held  a  last  dismal 
cabinet  meeting  in  the  evening  and  set  forth  southward  that 
night.  Next  day  the  first  force  of  Federal  troops,  "about 
sixty-five  white  men  and  fifteen  negroes,"  entered  the  town 
and  went  into  camp.  Several  days  later  the  streets  were 
placarded  with  offers  of  $100,000  reward  for  the  capture 
of  Jefferson  Davis  under  a  charge  of  complicity  in  Booth's 
assassination  of  Lincoln;  and  shortly  afterward  came  the 
news  that  the  capture  had  been  made  at  Irwinville,  Georgia. 

Just  after  the  dispersal  of  the  Confederate  authorities, 
a  bag  containing  five  or  six  thousand  dollars  in  silver  from 
the  defunct  treasury  was  found  upon  the  Toombs  premises; 
and  Toombs  promptly  delivered  it  to  the  commandant  of 


254  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

the  local  Federal  garrison.*  Whether  this  episode  indicated 
more  prudence  or  probity,  fear  or  scorn  on  Toombs's  part 
the  reader  may  surmise. 

Toombs  was  left  unmolested  by  the  Federal  military  until 
May  n.  On  that  day  however,  a  fresh  detachment  of 
troops  entered  the  town  and  proceeded  to  Toombs's  home 
with  an  order  from  the  Secretary  of  War  for  his  arrest.  But 
Toombs  fled  from  the  house  as  the  soldiers  were  approach 
ing,!  and  lay  in  hiding  until  a  young  friend,  Charles  E. 
Irwin,  who  had  just  returned  from  a  lieutenancy  in  the 
artillery  under  Longstreet,  got  into  communication  with 
him  and  arranged  a  rendezvous  at  a  farm  some  eighteen 
miles  from  Washington.  He  led  thither  next  morning 
Toombs's  well-known  war-horse,  Gray  Alice,  and  served 
as  companion  and  messenger  for  the  fugitive  during  the 
following  weeks.|  The  two  men  journeyed  into  northeastern 
Georgia,  where  Toombs  kept  moving  about  to  avoid  capture 
while  Irwin  went  on  errands  to  open  communications  for 
Toombs  at  his  home  and  at  Savannah.  On  Augusts,  1865, 
General  J.  B.  Steedman  in  command  of  the  Federal  troops 
in  the  district  telegraphed  from  Augusta  to  the  Secretary 
of  War:  "The  wife  of  Robert  Toombs  of  Georgia  desires  to 
know  whether  Mr.  Toombs  can  be  paroled  if  he  surrenders 
to  the  military  authorities."  Secretary  Stanton  replied, 
August  II :  "Your  telegram  respecting  Robert  Toombs  has 
been  submitted  to  the  President,  who  directs  that  if  Mr. 
Toombs  comes  within  the  reach  of  the  U.  S.  forces  he  be 
immediately  arrested  and  sent  in  close  custody  to  Fort 
Warren."  §  At  Savannah  Irwin  tried  unsuccessfully  to 

*  Andrews,  War-time  Journal,  p.  245;  War  of  the  Rebellion  Official  Records, 
series  I,  vol.  49,  part  2,  p.  955. 

f  Andrews,  War-time  Journal,  pp.  241-244. 

J  The  account  of  Toombs's  experiences  as  a  fugitive  is  taken  mainly 
from  Stovall,  Toombs,  chap.  24. 

§  War  of  the  Rebellion  Official  Records,  series  II,  vol.  8,  pp.  714,  716. 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN     255 

make  arrangements  for  Toombs  to  leave  the  country  through 
that  port.  He  then  rejoined  Toombs  in  central  Georgia 
and  accompanied  him  on  a  cautious  horseback  journey  to 
the  latter' s  plantation  in  Stewart  county,  and  thence  by 
rail  and  steamboat  to  Mobile  and  New  Orleans,  whence 
Toombs  sailed,  November  4,  for  Havana.  There,  at  last, 
on  foreign  soil  he  was  safe  from  arrest. 

When  Andrew  Johnson,  soon  after  his  accession  to  the 
presidency,  reacted  from  his  first  impulse  of  vindictiveness 
toward  the  South  and  adopted  a  policy  of  moderation  in 
reconstruction,  a  certain  number  of  Southern  public  men 
rallied  to  his  support,  including  Brown  of  Georgia  and  Orr 
of  South  Carolina.  Toombs  on  the  other  hand  was  opposed 
to  all  compromise  or  cooperation  with  those  whom  he  deemed 
the  enemies  of  the  South.  He  wrote  Stephens  from  Havana, 
December  15,  1865,  expressing  his  contempt  for  the  sub- 
missionists.  "Orr  says,"  said  he,  "the  war  has  settled  this 
constitutional  principle  and  that  constitutional  principle, 
etc.,  etc.  How  does  war  settle  anything  except  which  is 
the  strongest  party  to  the  pending  contest?"  As  regards 
his  own  plans,  he  was  resolved  to  keep  out  of  reach  of  the 
United  States  authorities.  He  wrote: 

"Nobody  is  strong  enough  to  keep  me  out  of  Fort  Warren 
except  Johnson.  All  the  Supreme  Court  could  not  do  it  if 
they  wanted  to  do  so.  'The  life  of  the  nation'  would  be 
adjudged  by  the  commander-in-chief  to  require  incar 
ceration;  and  if  anything  more  was  deemed  needful  to  the 
'life  of  the  nation/  a  military  court  could  hang  me  much 
more  rightfully  than  it  could  the  poor  woman  (Mrs.  Surratt 
I  believe)  who  was  hung  in  Washington;  for  I  did  try  to 
take  'the  life  of  the  nation,'  and  sorely  regret  the  failure  to 
do  it." 

As  regards  the  conditions  and  problems  of  the  South,  he 
deprecated  the  movement  for  getting  rid  of  military  govern 
ment,  and  advocated  a  policy  of  complete  passiveness.  He 
wrote : 


256  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

"The  true  policy  of  the  South  is  to  stand  still,  do  nothing, 
let  the  Yankees  try  their  hands  on  Cuffee.  If  you  try  to 
help  them  all  failures  are  yours,  not  theirs;  and  one  thing, 
my  friend,  you  may  rely  upon,  as  long  as  'grass  grows  or 
water  flows, '  —  that  is  that  you  can  not  grow  cotton  or  corn 
in  the  South  except  by  small  planters  independent  of  paid 
labor,  without  a  law  for  the  specific  performance  of  contracts. 
This  principle  involves  the  whole  law  and  prophets  of 
Southern  agriculture.  Without  that  we  must  abandon  the 
application  of  capital  to  agriculture  except  on  two  hundred 
acre  (or  less)  holdings.  That  is,  we  must  come  to  the  tenant 
system  of  Europe.  How  that  will  succeed  were  too  long  a 
tale  for  me  now." 

Toombs  thought  for  a  time  of  locating  in  Mexico;  but 
he  soon  gave  up  that  plan.  His  wife  joined  him  at  Havana 
and  they  sojourned  there  during  the  winter  and  spring.  In 
May  she  returned  home,  while  he  proceeded  to  Europe  in 
further  prospecting  for  a  home.  Mrs.  Toombs  joined  him 
in  Paris  in  July  and  they  spent  the  following  year  and  a  half 
in  European  exile.  Their  living  expenses  were  defrayed 
by  the  sale  of  part  of  his  great  tract  of  land  in  Texas.  The 
land  was  wild  and  the  price  low;  and  Toombs  was  fond  of 
saying  while  abroad  that  he  was  eating  an  acre  of  dirt  a 
day! 

Neither  Toombs's  spirit  nor  his  resolution  to  remain  in 
exile  appear  to  have  flagged  until  in  December,  1866,  he 
received  a  cable  despatch  telling  him  of  the  death  of  his 
daughter,  Mrs.  Dudley  M.  DuBose.  Mrs.  Toombs  at 
once  returned  home,  leaving  her  husband,  like  herself, 
bowed  down.  For  the  first  time  he  felt  the  pangs  of  a 
genuine  exile.  Grief-stricken  and  lonely,  he  felt  the  weight 
of  increasing  years  and  his  dependence  upon  his  remaining 
dear  ones  at  home.  Within  a  few  weeks  he  found  his  exile 
insupportable,  and  notified  his  wife  that  he  was  about  to 
return.  "The  worst  that  can  happen  to  me  is  a  prison," 
said  he,  "and  I  don't  see  much  to  choose  between  my  present 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED  GEORGIAN      257 

position  and  any  decent  fort."  *  Returning  to  the  United 
States  in  the  spring  of  1867  he  had  a  satisfactory  interview 
with  President  Johnson,  went  home,  and  was  never  molested 
by  the  Federal  authorities.  All  of  the  political  prisoners 
but  Davis  had  long  since  been  released,  and  the  country, 
absorbed  in  the  current  problems  of  race  relations  and  party 
politics,  had  lost  interest  in  punishing  the  leaders  of  the 
defeated  effort  at  Southern  independence.  Toombs  never 
applied  for  amnesty  nor  took  the  oath  of  allegiance;  and 
though  continuing  to  be  a  citizen  of  Georgia  he  never  regained 
citizenship  in  the  United  States,  and  of  course  he  never 
afterward  held  office  nor  voted  in  national  elections. 

But  he  did  not  lose  his  interest  nor  his  influence  in  public 
affairs.  His  few  terse  letters  fom  his  home  to  Stephens  in 
1867,  for  example,  give  illuminating  glimpses  of  the  pre 
vailing  conditions.  On  June  14  he  wrote:  "I  see  that  Brown 
is  still  speaking,  rehashing  the  same  old  story  as  his  sole 
capital,  to  wit  that  it  will  be  'worser  for  us'  unless  we  give 
in  quickly,  'and  he  plays  upon  a  harp  of  a  thousand  strings, 
the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect/"  Ten  days  later  he 
wrote,  "From  what  I  can  see,  there  is  likely  to  be  a  square- 
cut  black  and  white  contest  in  this  country,  each  color 
gradually  falling  into  line.  Events  do  not  look  well  to  me 
here.  Crops  very  good,  the  country  very  desponding  and 
broken  up.  They  do  not  understand  the  new  order  of  things 
financially,  and  have  all  lost  heavily.  Almost  all  my  friends 
are  broke." 

In  a  letter  of  November  14  he  discussed  the  confiscatory 
character  of  the  congressional  tax  on  cotton: 

"  I  have  been  examining  and  studying  for  a  few  days  past 
the  burthen  on  the  production  of  cotton  in  the  rebel  states, 
and  without  working  out  anything  new  I  am  perfectly  aston 
ished  at  my  own  results.  I  will  throw  them  into  shape  as 
soon  as  I  have  leisure  and  present  them  to  our  people  as  a 

*  Stovall,  Toombs,  p.  313. 


258  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

warning  against  any  further  efforts  to  produce  it  under 
existing  laws.  To  get  accurate]  details  I  took  two  farms 
of  my  brother's,  one  in  Stewart  and  the  other  in  Wilkes; 
and  the  result  is  curious.  The  i\  cents  tax  [i.e.  per  pound  of 
cotton  produced]  on  his  Stewart  place  amounted  to  10  per  cent 
on  his  whole  investment]  in  Stewart  County!!  (say  $30,000). 
.  .  .  His  Wilkes  investment  shows  equally  alarming  figures, 
with  a  very  successful  year's  work.  The  result  is  starva 
tion  to  the  negro,  and  poverty  to  the  planter  if  he  will  plant 
cotton." 

At  this  time  Toombs  was  making  substantial  progress 
in  rebuilding  his  law  practise.  Indeed  he  soon  became  per 
haps  the  foremost  lawyer  in  the  state;  and  his  professional 
earnings  together  with  his  profits  from  wise  investments 
made  him  quite  a  wealthy  man.  But  in  making  investments 
he  carefully  avoided  anything  which  might  set  a  bad  example 
to  his  fellow-citizens;  and  at  the  bar  he  held  himself  as  a 
tribune  of  the  people.  He  was  particularly  active  in  prose 
cuting  claims  on  behalf  of  citizens  and  the  state  against 
corporations,  with  a  view  to  restricting  their  greed,  diminish 
ing  their  irresponsibility  and  destroying  their  tyranny.  His 
chief  interest  in  the  course  of  legislation  in  these  post- 
bellum  years  was  to  promote  the  public  control  of  corpora 
tions  and  diminish  the  corporation  control  of  public  affairs. 
In  the  stress  of  the  Reconstruction  strife,  however,  he  could 
not  keep  silent  indefinitely  upon  the  issues  of  federal  rela 
tions  and  party  politics. 

Throughout  1867  and  1868  public  interest  in  Georgia 
was  absorbed  by  an  angry  debate  between  the  advocates  of 
resistance  and  those  of  submission  to  the  Reconstruction 
programme  of  the  Republicans  who  controlled  Congress. 
The  first  impulse  of  the  people  had  been,  of  course,  to  obstruct 
the  oppressive  Radical  plans;  and  the  legislature  in  a  quiet 
session  in  November,  1866,  had  rejected  the  proposed  Four 
teenth  Amendment  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote.*  Ex- 
*  Federal  Union,  Nov.  13,  1866. 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN      259 

Governor  Brown,  however,  after  going  to  Washington  and 
sounding  the  temper  of  Congress  in  February,  1867,  issued 
a  public  letter  declaring  that  the  only  means  of  escaping 
yet  more  radical  measures  was  for  the  Southern  states  to 
accept  the  congressional  programme  and  cooperate  in  its 
enforcement.  His  letter  was  received  with  a  storm  of  popu 
lar  denunciation,  which  of  course  grew  still  more  vehement 
when  Congress  enacted  over  President  Johnson's  veto  the 
atrocious  legislation  of  March  2  and  March  23  destroying 
the  reestablished  state  governments  and  providing  for  a 
fresh  reconstruction  on  the  base  of  an  extensive  disfran- 
chisement  of  the  Southern  whites  and  universal  suffrage 
for  the  negroes.  Brown  resolutely  maintained  his  position, 
and  soon  incurred  still  greater  opprobrium  by  joining  the 
Republican  party.  Nearly  all  of  the  other  public  men  in 
the  state  denounced  him,  and  the  people  showed  him  their 
intense  disfavor  by  social  ostracism.  The  leadership  of  the 
policy  of  defiance  was  assumed  by  Benjamin  H.  Hill,  in  a 
speech  at  Atlanta  in  July,  1867,  and  his  celebrated  "Notes 
on  the  Situation,"  published  in  the  newspapers  during  the 
following  months.*  Brown  replied  and  a  bitter  controversy 
between  the  two  men  ensued. 

In  December,  1867,  a  "black  and  tan"  constitutional  con 
vention,  elected  under  congressional  authority  in  October, 
met  in  Atlanta  to  revise  the  state  constitution.  The  state 
treasurer,  supported  by  Governor  Jenkins,  refused  to  pay 
the  drafts  to  meet  the  expenses  of  this  convention,  and 
General  Meade,  commandant  of  the  military  district  includ 
ing  Georgia,  removed  the  governor  and  treasurer  from  office 
and  detailed  two  United  States  army  officers  for  service  as 
governor  and  treasurer  of  the  state  of  Georgia.  Shortly 
afterward  a  general  election  was  ordered  to  be  held  in  May 
for  the  choice  of  a  governor  and  a  legislature  and  for  the  rati- 

*  Reprinted  in  B.  H.  Hill,  Jr.,  Life,  Speeches  and  Writings  of  E.  H.  Hill, 
pp.  730-811. 


260  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

fication  or  rejection  of  the  newly-framed  state  constitution. 
The  campaign  brought  forth  violence  by  the  Ku  Klux  Klan 
on  the  one  hand  and  the  Loyal  League,  supported  by  the 
Federal  army,  on  the  other.  Intimidation  and  fraud  were 
so  rife  that  the  outcome  at  the  polls  was  highly  confused. 
The  military  authorities  had  control  of  the  election  machinery, 
however,  and  declared  the  ratification  of  the  new  constitu 
tion  and  the  election  of  Rufus  B.  Bullock,  the  Republican 
candidate,  over  John  B.  Gordon  as  governor  for  a  term  of 
four  years,  and  the  election  of  a  Republican  majority  in  the 
legislature.  But  the  exhibition  of  Democratic  strength  at 
the  polls  was  strong  enough  to  stimulate  a  great  rally  of  the 
party. 

Additional  stimulus  was  given  when  the  National  Demo 
cratic  convention  which  met  at  New  York,  July  4,  resolved, 
"We  regard  the  Reconstruction  Acts  ...  of  Congress  .  .  . 
as  usurpations  and  unconstitutional,  revolutionary  and  void." 
In  Georgia  a  Democratic  convention  was  promptly  called 
to  meet  at  Atlanta,  July  23,  to  ratify  the  national  platform 
and  nominate  a  ticket  of  Seymour  and  Blair  electors;  and 
this  occasion  was  seized  for  holding  a  great  popular  mass- 
meeting.  A  huge  "bush  arbor"  was  built  near  the  railroad 
station  in  Atlanta,  and  excursion  trains  brought  thousands 
from  every  direction  to  hear  the  celebrated  speakers  who 
were  announced  in  the  programme. 

Toombs  in  the  initial  speech  at  the  bush-arbor  meeting 
made  virtually  his  first  public  utterance  since  the  collapse 
of  the  Confederacy.*  This  speech  dealt  in  few  personalities, 
had  few  local  allusions,  and  no  touches  of  humor  or  even  of 
sarcasm.  It  was  merely  a  vigorous  but  relatively  unim- 
passioned  analysis  of  the  existing  situation,  a  condemnation 
of  the  Republican  programme  of  Reconstruction  and  an 

*  Great  speech  of  Gen.  Robert  Toombs,  delivered  in  Atlanta,  Ga.,  July  23* 
1868,  specially  reported  by  the  "Chronicle  and  Sentinel"  Augusta,  Ga.,  1868. 
8  pp. 


AN   UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN      261 

appeal  for  loyal  Georgians  to  rally  to  the  support  of  the 
Democratic  party.  The  speaker  was  not  himself  optimistic, 
and  he  did  not  increase  the  hopefulness  of  his  audience.  He 
was  grave  and  resolute,  and  he  succeeded  in  his  purpose  of 
increasing  the  gravity  and  resolution  of  his  hearers. 

Toombs  was  followed  on  the  bush-arbor  platform  by 
Howell  Cobb  and  B.  H.  Hill,  whose  speeches  mingled  humor 
ous  and  telling  criticisms  of  the  anti-Democratic  policies 
with  perfervid  and  indiscreet  appeals  for  a  rally  in  behalf  of 
Southern  rights.  Cobb  for  example  said  in  one  of  the 
climaxes  of  his  speech,  which  on  the  whole  was  one  of  the 
most  eloquent  in  the  history  of  American  oratory:  "My 
friends,  they  [the  Republican  party]  are  our  enemies.  .  .  . 
Enemies  they  were  in  war,  enemies  they  continue  to  be  in 
peace.  In  war  we  drew  the  sword  and  bade  them  defiance; 
in  peace  we  gather  up  the  manhood  of  the  South,  and  raising 
the  banner  of  constitutional  liberty,  and  gathering  around 
it  the  good  men  of  the  North  as  well  as  the  South,  we  hurl 
into  their  teeth  the  same  defiance,  and  bid  them  come  on 
to  the  struggle."  The  chief  effect  of  such  expressions  was 
to  give  campaign  material  to  the  Republican  agitators,  a 
principal  source  of  whose  strength  with  Northern  voters 
lay  in  their  assertions  of  the  rebellious  disposition  of  the 
South. 

In  Georgia  when  the  great  bush-arbor  meeting  dispersed 
the  people  took  home' with  them  the  teaching  of  their  political 
preachers  and  prophets,  and  worked  and  waited  for  the 
better  times  to  come.  The  waiting,  however,  was  weary, 
for  the  state  was  destined  yet  to  undergo  the  deepest  travail 
before  the  recapture  of  her  government  by  the  Democrats. 

The  Democratic  ticket,  it  is  true,  carried  the  state  in  the 
presidential  election  of  1868;  but  Grant  was  elected  by  a 
huge  majority  in  the  country  at  large  and  gave  the  support 
of  the  administration  and  the  army  to  the  Radical  govern 
ment  in  Georgia.  Prompted  and  abetted  by  Foster  Blodg- 


262  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT   TOOMBS 

ett,  H.  I.  Kimball  and  their  crew  of  plunderers,  the  Bullock 
administration  instituted  a  carnival  of  public  spoliation. 
After  rendering  the  legislature  subservient  by  using  the 
military  to  purge  it  of  its  more  honest  members,  they  pro 
ceeded  by  issuing  state  bonds  in  subsidy  of  railroad  cor 
porations  controlled  by  the  gang,  and  by  numerous  other 
devices,  to  pour  public  money  into  their  own  private 
purses. 

Toombs  of  course  denounced  this  plundering  with  all  his 
vehemence  on  every  occasion,  declaring  the  issue  of  securities 
to  be  invalid  and  pledging  himself  to  work  for  the  annul 
ment  of  the  bonds  and  all  similar  achievements  of  the  Radi 
cals  until  success  should  crown  his  efforts.  He  said  on  more 
than  one  occasion:  "We  will  adopt  a  new  constitution  with 
a  clause  repudiating  these  bonds,  and  like  ^Etna  spew  the 
monstrous  frauds  out  of  the  market." 

In  a  public  lecture  entitled  "Magna  Carta"  which  he 
delivered  in  many  towns  of  the  state,  as  well  as  in  speeches 
at  county  fairs  and  in  arguments  before  courts  and  juries, 
he  reiterated  his  censures  and  his  pledges.  He  also  denounced 
the  enactment  by  the  Radicals  of  laws  to  exempt  homesteads 
from  seizure  for  debt  and  to  exempt  certain  corporations 
from  taxation.  The  homestead  laws,  said  he  while  arguing 
a  case  before  the  state  supreme  court,  put  a  premium  on 
dishonesty  and  robbed  poor  men  of  their  capital.  In  reply 
to  a  question  from  the  bench  as  to  the  intention  of  the  legis 
lature  in  enacting  the  legislation  he  said,  "Yes,  may  it 
please  the  court,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  the 
intention  of  the  legislature  to  defraud  the  creditor;  but  they 
have  failed  to  put  their  intention  in  a  form  that  would  stand, 
so  it  becomes  necessary  for  this  court  to  add  its  own  ingenuity 
to  this  villainy.  It  seems  that  this  court  is  making  laws 
rather  than  decisions."  The  court  decided  against  him  in 
spite  of  a  vehement  dissent  by  Judge  Hiram  Warner;  but 
the  decision  was  overruled  in  Toombs's  favor  by  the  United 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN     263 

States  Supreme  Court.*  Toombs  was  so  caustic  in  criticis 
ing  Bullock  and  his  legislature  that  the  court  made  a  rule 
that  no  attorney  while  conducting  a  case  should  abuse  a 
coordinate  branch  of  the  state  government,  and  warned 
Toombs  against  incurring  the  penalties  of  contempt.  Toombs 
observed  the  rule  until  Bullock's  resignation  and  flight, 
noted  below.  Shortly  thereafter  in  an  argument  before  the 
court  Toombs  took  occasion  to  allude  to  Bullock  in  censorious 
terms  and  to  twit  the  court:  "May  it  please  your  honors, 
the  Governor  has  now  absconded.  Your  honors  have  put 
in  a  little  rule  to  catch  me.  In  seeking  to  protect  the  powers 
that  be,  I  presume  you  did  not  intend  to  defend  the  powers 
that  were."  f  In  regard  to  tax-exemption  of  corporations 
he  said:  "You  may  by  your  deep-laid  schemes  lull  the 
thoughtless,  enlist  the  selfish,  and  stifle  for  a  while  the  voices 
of  patriots,  but  the  day  of  reckoning  will  come.  These 
cormorant  corporations,  these  so-called  patriotic  developers, 
whom  you  seek  to  exempt,  shall  pay  their  dues,  if  justice 
lives.  By  the  Living  God,  they  shall  pay  them."  t  In 
after  years  he  devoted  himself  as  an  attorney  for  the  state 
to  the  collection  of  these  arrears  of  taxation  from  the  rail 
roads,  with  ultimate  success. 

Ex-Governor  Brown,  whom  Bullock  had  appointed  chief- 
justice,  and  numerous  others  who  had  entered  the  Republican 
party  with  honest  motives,  were  turned  against  Bullock  and 
his  gang  by  their  misdeeds;  and  in  1870  a  strong  Democratic 
majority  was  elected  to  the  legislature.  Confronted  with 
the  prospect  of  impeachment,  Bullock  resigned  the  govern 
orship  in  October  1871  and  fled  to  New  York.  Toombs 
promptly  had  him  indicted  on  a  charge  of  embezzlement. 
Bullock  escaped  arrest  for  several  years,  but  was  finally 
tried  and  acquitted  by  a  Georgia  jury. 

In  1870  there  began  a  series  of  surprising  readjustments 
*  Stovall,  Toombs,  pp.  317,  318. 
t  Ibid.,  pp.  320,  321.  t  Ibid.,  P-  319. 


264  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

in  the  relations  of  the  established  political  leaders  in  Georgia. 
Toombs  wrote  Stephens,  January  24,  1870,  after  a  visit  to 
Atlanta,  which  had  recently  been  made  the  capital  of  the 
state:  "I  went  to  Atlanta  to  see  if  I  could  be  of  any  service 
in  the  present  'coup  d'ttat'  of  Bullock  and  his  conspirators. 
.  .  .  Bryant  is  the  candidate  of  the  Democrats  for  speaker 
of  the  house,  and  I  and  Joe  Brown  are  trying  to  elect  him! 
Rather  a  strange  conjunction  is  it  not?  But  you  know  my 
rule  is  to  use  the  devil  if  I  can  do  better  to  save  the  country." 
After  another  trip  on  the  same  errand  he  wrote  further, 
February  8:  "Brown  seems  really  in  earnest  in  his  endeav 
our  to  defeat  Bullock  and  his  schemes.  I  don't  [know] 
whether  or  not  he  sees  where  his  present  course  will  land 
him,  but  I  suppose  he  does.  There  were  many  curious 
developments  which  I  don't  care  to  put  on  paper  but  will 
tell  you  all  about  when  we  meet.  We  thought  we  had  the 
crowd  pretty  dead  two  or  three  times,  but  the  spirit  of  evil 
at  Washington  was  too  strong  for  us,  and  poor  Grant 
could  not  'stick.'"  By  the  end  of  the  year  Brown  seems 
to  have  returned  to  full  Democratic  fellowship,  though  for 
some  years  thereafter  Toombs,  who  considered  himself  the 
official  censor  of  political  morals,  continued  to  view  him  with 
suspicion. 

In  the  following  autumn  a  vigorous  campaign  was  made 
by  the  Democrats  for  the  election  of  congressmen  in  October 
and  a  legislature  in  December.  Both  efforts  were  successful. 
But  on  the  eve  of  the  legislative  election  Benjamin  H.  Hill 
seems  to  have  fallen  into  a  panic  at  the  fancied  prospect  of 
impending  strife.  He  issued,  December  8,  an  address  to 
the  people  of  Georgia,  recanting  many  of  his  recent  views  and 
recommending  that  the  Reconstruction  amendments  be 
accepted  as  accomplished  facts,  that  the  negroes  be  pro 
tected  in  the  exercise  of  the  suffrage,  and  that  citizens 
disregard  party  lines  and  apply  no  test  but  that  of  honesty 
in  choosing  between  candidates.  Hill  of  course  promptly 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN     265 

fell  heir  to  all  the  obloquy  with  which  Brown  had  been  loaded 
and  from  which  the  latter  was  now  emerging. 

At  the  end  of  the  year  the  most  salient  public  question 
was  the  lease  of  the  Western  and  Atlantic  railroad.  This 
road  had  been  built  by  the  state  of  Georgia  and  thus  far 
had  been  publicly  operated.*  During  Brown's  ante-bellum 
governorship  the  road  had  yielded  handsome  net  revenues, 
but  under  the  Radical  rule  it  had  been  a  constant  drain  upon 
the  state  treasury.  Yet  the  track  had  been  allowed  to  fall 
into  such  bad  condition  that  in  1870  officials  of  connecting 
lines  began  to  protest  that  it  was  too  dangerous  to  run  their 
cars  upon.  When  the  legislature  met  in  October,  Blodgett, 
the  thieving  superintendent,  demanded  an  appropriation 
of  $500,000  for  repairs,  and  proposed  as  an  alternative  that 
the  state  should  lease  the  road  to  some  of  its  citizens.  A  bill 
to  lease  the  road  for  twenty  years  was  promptly  introduced, 
and  was  supported  by  numerous  capitalists  and  politicians 
who  formed  themselves  into  two  rival  companies  to  bid  for 
the  lease.  When  the  bill  was  passed  and  bids  were  invited, 
one  of  the  companies  bid  $34,500  per  month  but  was  denied 
the  lease  on  the  ground  that  the  security  which  it  offered  was 
not  adequate.  The  other  company,  organized  by  Joseph  E. 
Brown  who  had  resigned  his  judicial  office,  included  Benjamin 
H.  Hill,  Alexander  H.  Stephens  and  other  men  of  various 
types  in  political  life,  together  with  a  group  of  railroad  presi 
dents;  and  the  bid  of  $25,000  per  month  by  this  company 
was  accepted  by  the  governor.  Toombs  at  once  wrote 
Stephens,  December  30,  1870:  "I  was  surprised  to  see  your 
name  in  the  state  lease.  Is  there  anything  in  it?  I  hope 
and  believe  not,  of  course,  unless  you  have  been  misled  in 
the  business.  It  is  a  lot  of  the  greatest  rogues  on  the  conti 
nent,  your  name  alone  excepted."  Stephens  replied  immedi 
ately  saying  he  had  applied  for  permission  to  participate  in 

*  U.  B.  Phillips,  History  of  Transportation  in  the  Eastern  Cotton  Belt, 
Chap.  7. 


266  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

the  project  because  he  thought  it  would  be  advantageous 
both  to  the  state  and  to  the  stockholders.  Toombs  replied 
the  same  night  exculpating  Stephens  from  blame  but  censur 
ing  the  project.  A  few  days  afterward  Stephens  publicly 
announced  his  repudiation  of  the  enterprise  and  transferred 
his  one  ninety-second  part  of  the  capital  stock  of  the  cor 
poration  to  the  state  of  Georgia.  An  unfortunate  aftermath 
to  this  episode  was  a  misunderstanding  between  Stephens 
and  Toombs  in  the  spring  of  1874,  over  legal  proceedings 
in  regard  to  the  share  which  the  former  had  held  in  the 
Western  and  Atlantic  company.  Stephens  petulantly  took 
offense  at  a  fancied  imputation,  and  rushed  into  print  to 
defend  himself  and  censure  Toombs;  but  Toombs  patiently 
explained  the  matter  to  Stephens's  satisfaction,  and  the 
two  were  again  inseparable.  Stephens  was  probably  the 
only  person,  outside  his  family,  with  whom  Toombs  was  ever 
patient. 

With  the  election  of  a  Democratic  legislature,  the  with 
drawal  of  Federal  troops,  and  the  flight  of  Bullock,  the 
Radical  regime  in  Georgia  collapsed.  In  December,  1871, 
James  M.  Smith,  the  Democratic  candidate,  was  elected 
Governor  without  opposition,  and  next  month  was  inaugu 
rated  amid  tremendous  rejoicing.  Both  Toombs  and  Brown 
were  among  the  dignitaries  who  lent  their  presence  to  the 
occasion;  but  these  twain  were  destined  to  have  another 
sharp  quarrel  before  amity  was  restored.  This  altercation 
arose  in  July,  1872,  when  a  private  letter  of  Toombs's  was 
printed  which  insinuated  that  Brown  had  helped  to  lobby 
a  certain  bill  through  the  legislature,  which  defrauded  the 
state  of  a  sum  of  money.  Brown  replied  in  a  public  letter 
giving  the  lie  to  the  insinuation.  Toombs  then  sent  him 
an  inquiry  asking  whether  he  would  accept  a  challenge,  and 
Brown  adroitly  replied  that  that  question  would  be  answered 
when  the  challenge  was  received.  Whereupon  Toombs 
appears  to  have  bethought  him  that  duelling  was  not  a  fit 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN     267 

recourse  for  graybeards,  and  he  resumed  his  pen  for  the 
public  press  instead  of  demanding  the  use  of  pistols.  The 
episode  aided  Brown  in  recovering  public  good  will,  some 
what  at  Toombs's  expense. 

By  1872  the  Radical  outrages  in  the  Southern  states, 
together  with  the  venality  of  the  Grant  administration, 
became  nauseous  to  many  Northern  Republicans,  and  a 
considerable  element  of  them,  calling  themselves  Liberals, 
bolted  the  party.  The  Democrats  rejoiced  at  this;  and 
most  of  them  favored  a  merging  of  their  party  with  the 
Republican  malcontents.  Toombs  was  however,  as  usual 
in  this  later  portion  of  his  career,  uncompromising;  and 
Stephens  stood  with  him.  Their  opposition  to  the  proposed 
"new  departure"  was  intensified  when  the  Liberal  Republi 
can  movement  miscarried  in  the  nomination  of  the  senile 
and  unfit  Horace  Greeley.  The  prevailing  sentiment  among 
Georgia  Democrats,  however,  was  to  grasp  at  victory  on 
any  terms.  When  the  state  convention  met  at  Atlanta, 
June  26,  Toombs  fought  the  Greeley  plan  and  procured  the 
adoption  of  resolutions  that  the  Georgia  delegates  to  Balti 
more  should  go  uninstructed.  But  the  Greeley  men  were 
strong  enough  to  control  the  choice  of  delegates.  "As  the 
names  were  read  out,  Gen.  Toombs  was  heard  to  exclaim 
audibly,  'Packed,  by  God.'"*  When  Greeley  was  nomi 
nated  at  Baltimore,  Toombs,  Stephens  and  their  following 
refused  to  support  him,  and  nominated  a  "straight  Demo 
cratic"  ticket  for  Charles  O'Connor  as  President.  At  the 
polls  in  Georgia  75,896  votes  were  cast  for  Greeley,  62,485 
for  Grant  and  3999  for  O'Connor. 

Through  these  years  Toombs  kept  in  sleepless  memory  his 
resolution  to  give  Georgia  a  new  and  sounder  constitution, 
but  he  still  had  to  bide  his  time  until  affairs  in  both  state 
and  nation  were  ripe.  Of  affairs  in  Georgia  he  wrote  Ste 
phens,  January  21,  1872:  "The  legislature  is  feeble,  raw, 
*  Avery,  History  of  Georgia,  p.  502. 


268  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

irresolute  and  easily  led  away."  Of  national  politics  he 
wrote,  November  6,  1874,  when  somewhat  cheered  by  the 
congressional  election:  "Nothing  can  arrest  the  onward 
tide  in  favor  of  the  Democrats  but  their  own  folly,  and  I  am 
afraid  they  will  supply  a  plenty  of  that." 

In  1876  Toombs  vigorously  disapproved  the  Democratic 
nomination  of  Tilden,  particularly  after  the  publication  of 
the  latter's  weak  letter  of  acceptance.  Toombs  wrote 
Stephens,  October  30:  "I  never  hoped  for  anything  from  an 
old  Van  Buren  Free-soiler  trained  in  Tammany  Hall  and 
Wall  Street.  .  .  .  The  mongrel  crew  who  call  themselves 
Democrats  .  .  .  want  Tilden  elected  for  the  same  reason 
that  Falstaff  rejoiced  at  Prince  Hal's  reconciliation  with 
the  old  King — 'Hal,  rob  me  the  exchecquer/" 

The  disputes  which  arose  from  the  results  at  the  polls 
in  November  of  course  made  Toombs  apprehensive  of  con 
tinued  tyranny  at  the  hands  of  the  Republicans,  and  he 
exhorted  the  Democrats  to  die  in  the  last  ditch  rather  than 
submit  to  an  autocratic  settlement  of  the  issue.  But  the 
final  outcome  by  which  the  inauguration  of  Hayes  was  per 
mitted  in  exchange  for  a  pledge  that  he  would  put  a  stop 
to  all  federal  interference  in  Southern  affairs  was  highly 
satisfactory  to  this  unflagging  champion  of  Southern  rights. 
He  wrote  Stephens,  April  24,  1877: 

"I  have  been  so  busy  with  my  personal  and  professional 
affairs  for  the  last  three  months  that  I  have  scarcely  had 
time  to  keep  the  run  of  public  events.  They  seem  to  me  to 
be  in  a  curious  condition.  It  may  result  in  throwing  over 
board  the  worst  materials  of  the  Radical  party,  and  I  am 
quite  sure  that  nothing  worse  or  even  so  bad  can  follow. 
The  fraudulent  coalition  calling  itself  the  Democratic  party 
of  the  South  and  the  North  as  well,  are  horrified  at  the 
Southern  policy  of  Hayes.  They  fear  it  may  'split  the 
party/  So  much  the  better  if  it  does.  It  certainly  needs 
sifting  and  cleansing.  As  to  the  Northern  Democrats 
[they]  seem  ardently  to  desire  bad  government  at  the  South, 


AN    UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN     269 

that  they  may  make  capital  for  themselves  at  home.  They 
do  not  want  redress,  but  grievances  to  complain  of.  While 
that  may  be  fun  for  the  children  it  is  death  to  the  frogs.  I 
hope  Hayes  will  put  honest  men  in  office  at  the  South  and 
care  not  a  copper  for  their  politics." 

For  the  two  years  preceding  1877  Toombs  had  urged  the 
people  in  speeches  delivered  throughout  the  state  to  repu 
diate  the  fraudulent  bonds  issued  by  the  Bullock  govern 
ment  and  to  order  a  thorough  revision  of  the  constitution. 
Early  in  1877  the  repudiation  was  accomplished  by  consti 
tutional  amendment,  and  the  question  of  calling  a  constitu 
tional  convention  was  submitted  by  the  legislature  to  the 
people.  Toombs  announced  himself  as  a  candidate  for 
election  to  the  convention  from  his  district,  and  in  a  public 
letter  of  April  26  urged  the  people  to  vote  in  favor  of  calling 
the  convention  and  presented  his  views  of  the  features  needed 
in  the  contemplated  new  frame  of  government.  These 
included  a  reduction  of  the  executive  patronage,  an  increased 
efficiency  of  the  judiciary  system,  a  shortening  of  the  four- 
year  senatorial  term,  a  more  equitable  distribution  of  sena 
torial  representation,  the  prevention  of  future  abuses  of 
public  credit,  the  public  control  of  corporations,  and  the 
improvement  of  the  homestead  exemption  law.  He  of 
course  denounced  the  source  and  character  of  the  existing 
constitution,  and  he  scouted  such  few  arguments  as  he  could 
find  against  the  framing  of  a  new  one.*  The  referendum 
in  June  resulted  favorably,  and  the  convention  assembled 
in  Atlanta,  July  u,  1877,  with  a  large  number  of  the  state's 
ablest  men,  including  Toombs,  among  its  194  members. 

The  convention  was  promptly  organized  with  Ex-Governor 
Charles  J.  Jenkins  as  president,  and  speedily  set  to  work.f 

*  Union  and  Recorder  (Milledgeville,  Ga.),  May  8,  1877. 

t  A  Stenographic  Report  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Constitutional  Convention 
held  in  Atlanta,  Georgia,  1877.  Reported  by  Samuel  W.  Small,  Atlanta, 
1877. 


270  THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

On  the  second  day  it  provided  for  the  appointment  of  thir 
teen  standing  committees  of  nine  members  each,  to  report 
proposals  upon  the  thirteen  subjects  assigned  them,  and  a 
fourteenth  committee  "on  the  order,  consistency  and  har 
mony  of  the  whole  constitution  ...  to  consist  of  two  mem 
bers  of  each  of  the  said  thirteen  standing  committees,  to 
which  final  committee  of  revision  the  said  thirteen  com 
mittees  shall  make  their  reports."  Toombs  was  appointed 
chairman  of  the  committee  on  the  legislative  department 
and  chairman  of  this  committee  on  revision. 

By  virtue  of  the  latter  appointment,  as  well  as  by  virtue 
of  his  personal  earnestness,  sound  judgment  and  vigor,  he 
dominated  the  convention.  He  spurred  the  several  com 
mittees  to  their  work,  and  within  a  week  began  to  present 
frequent  reports  from  the  committee  on  final  revision.  On 
the  floor  of  the  convention  he  steered  the  proceedings, 
laboring  always  not  only  to  procure  the  adoption  of  sound 
provisions  but  also  to  promote  the  utmost  expedition  of 
business  in  order  to  prevent  the  halting  of  its  work  by  the 
exhaustion  of  the  meager  $25,000  which  the  legislature  had 
provided  for  the  convention's  expenses.  When  in  spite  of 
his  prodding  the  convention  exhausted  its  appropriation 
before  completing  the  new  constitution,  Toombs  offered  to 
advance  to  the  state  from  his  own  purse  as  much  money  as 
might  be  needed  to  enable  the  convention  to  conclude  its 
task.  The  proffer  was  gratefully  accepted.  The  $20,000 
which  he  advanced  was  afterward  repaid  him  by  the  state. 

Because  of  his  powerful  influence  in  committee  proceed 
ings,  Toombs  had  few  occasions  to  make  elaborate  speeches 
in  the  convention.  Except  where  a  few  measures  to  which 
he  was  especially  devoted  were  concerned,  his  typical  partici 
pation  in  the  debates  on  the  floor  is  illustrated  by  his 
remarks  in  the  proceedings  of  the  eleventh  day,  when  a  pro 
posed  amendment  permitting  the  imprisonment  of  debtors 
was  under  discussion :  "  If  we  ever  expect  to  come  to  any  con- 


AN   UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN    271 

elusion  of  our  labors  we  cannot  be  making  [a]  collection  of 
laws  here.  All  this  convention  has  to  do  is  to  establish  a 
few  fundamental  principles  and  leave  these  other  matters 
to  the  legislature  and  the  people,  in  order  to  meet  the  ever 
varying  affairs  of  human  life.  I  move  to  lay  the  whole  of 
the  amendment  on  the  table."  The  motion  to  lay  on  the 
table  prevailed.* 

His  only  speeches  of  more  than  two  or  three  minutes  in 
length  were  devoted  to  the  reform  of  the  judiciary  and  the 
legislature  and  to  provisions  for  securing  the  taxation  and 
regulation  of  corporations.  He  advocated  the  increase  of 
the  number  of  judges  of  the  supreme  court  from  three  to  five, 
on  the  ground  that  "in  a  multitude  of  counsels  there  is 
wisdom";  but  in  this  proposal  he  was  defeated.  In  urging 
the  election  of  judges  by  the  general  assembly  rather  than 
by  the  people,  he  was  more  successful.  His  argument  here 
was  partly  upon  general  principles  and  partly  upon  the  need 
of  diminishing  the  prospective  evils  of  negro  suffrage,  f  In 
the  provisions  regarding  the  legislature,  his  chief  interest  lay 
in  making  representation  proportional  to  population.!  But 
in  the  previous  constitutions  of  the  state  the  rural  counties 
had  enjoyed  an  undue  proportion  of  representation  at  the 
expense  of  the  cities;  and  their  delegates,  clinging  to  this 
advantage,  were  able  to  defeat  the  reform.  The  senatorial 
term  of  office,  however,  was  reduced  from  four  to  two  years. 

Toombs's  principal  speeches  in  the  convention  were 
devoted  to  the  subject  of  corporations.  He  maintained  in 
phrases  unusual  in  that  generation  but  common  in  the  next, 
that  artificial  monopolies  should  be  prohibited,  that  natural 
monopolies  should  be  publicly  regulated,  and  that  all  cor 
porations  should  be  required  to  pay  their  full  share  of  taxa 
tion^  In  his  advocacy  of  the  regulation  of  railroad  rates 

*  Proceedings,  p.  87.  J  Ibid.,  pp.  343,  344,  359. 

t  Ibid.,  pp.  215,  223,  225. 

§  Ibid.,  pp.  95,  105-107, 298,  299,  315,  384, 394, 404-410, 466, 467- 


272         THE    LIFE    OF    ROBERT    TOOMBS 

he  easily  worsted  such  powerful  opponents  as  Ex-Governor 
Brown  and  General  A.  R.  Lawton,  and  he  also  carried  his 
proposals  to  prohibit  the  grant  of  irrevocable  franchises  and 
immunities,  to  prohibit  the  granting  of  state  aid  to  rail 
roads  and  the  purchase  of  railroad  stock  by  the  state,  and  to 
prohibit  the  interlocking  of  railroad  securities  in  such  way 
as  would  lessen  competition.  Incidentally  Toombs  carried 
through  his  project  for  reforming  the  provision  for  exempt 
ing  homesteads  from  debt.  The  convention  completed  its 
work  in  thirty-nine  days  and  adjourned  on  August  25.  The 
new  constitution  was  then  submitted  to  popular  ratification 
and  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  110,442  to  40,947.  It  was 
well  known  that  Toombs  had  been  the  hero  of  the  conven 
tion,  and  the  state  rang  again  with  his  acclaim. 

With  the  gift  of  this  admirable  new  constitution  to  Georgia 
Toombs' s  public  course  was  run,  except  for  his  lending  a 
hand  in  framing  the  railroad-commission  bill  of  1879,  which 
gave  effect  to  the  constitutional  mandate.  He  still  con 
tinued  his  championship  of  the  state  and  the  people  against 
the  corporations  in  the  courts,  and  continued  to  express 
forcible  opinions  upon  public  men  and  measures;  but  these 
remaining  years  were  distinctly  a  period  of  decline.  His 
eyesight  was  being  destroyed  by  cataracts,  his  health  was 
usually  poor,  and  he  was  depressed  by  the  sufferings  of  his 
adored  wife  from  a  malady  of  the  brain.  He  became  more 
addicted  to  the  use  of  liquors,  more  careless  of  his  dress,  his 
law  cases  and  his  investments.  He  grew  pessimistic  regard 
ing  state  and  national  politics,  and  more  caustic  in  his  com 
ments  upon  public  men.  Yet  in  the  saddest  of  these  years 
Toombs  was  an  inspiration  to  the  best  type  of  oncoming 
young  Georgians,  Henry  Grady  for  example,  who  made 
allowances  for  his  pathetic  failings,  loved  him  for  his  still 
rugged  virtues,  and  treasured  the  flashes  of  wit  and  wisdom 
which  he  still  gave  forth  in  his  conversation. 

In  March,   1883,  Toombs  made  one  of  his  last  public 


AN   UNRECONSTRUCTED    GEORGIAN     273 

appearances  at  the  bier  of  Stephens,  when  with  bent  frame, 
streaming  eyes  and  choking  voice  he  tried  to  express  his 
love  and  admiration  for  his  now  departed  lifelong  friend. 
In  the  following  autumn  he  was  still  more  broken  by  the 
death  of  his  wife.  But  his  old-man's  gloom  at  the  political 
decadence  of  the  times  was  joyously  ended  a  year  before 
his  death  by  the  election  to  the  presidency  not  only  of  a 
Democrat  but  of  a  sterling  advocate  of  tariff  and  pension 
reform,  sound  money  and  a  general  conservative,  construc 
tive  policy,  in  the  person  of  Grover  Cleveland.  Toombs 
now  for  the  first  time  expressed  regret  that  he  had  not  taken 
the  oath  of  allegiance  and  resumed  a  public  career.* 

At  the  end  of  September,  1885,  Toombs  took  his  bed  in 
his  last  illness.  In  his  delirium  he  would  talk  of  men  and 
affairs  of  other  times,  but  in  lucid  intervals  he  was  alert  for 
current  news  and  laconic  as  usual  in  his  comments.  At  one 
time  he  was  told  the  Georgia  legislature,  for  which  he  then 
had  not  much  esteem,  was  still  in  session.  "Lord,  send  for 
Cromwell,"  said  he. 

Bishop  George  F.  Pierce  of  the  Southern  Methodist  church 
had  been  the  intimate  friend  of  Toombs  ever  since  their 
college  days  together,  and  many  had  been  the  passages-at- 
arms  between  them.  Tradition  has  it  that  at  one  time  while 
Toombs  was  yet  a  Whig  he  made  reply  to  an  overture  by 
Pierce  on  behalf  of  the  church:  "George,  you  and  I  are  both 
doing  the  Lord's  work;  you  are  fighting  the  devil  and  I  am 
fighting  the  Democrats."  But  in  his  old  age  he  ceased 
bantering  on  religion,  accepted  the  simple  faith  of  his  wife, 
and  became  a  member  of  the  Methodist  church. 

Toombs  died  at  his  home,  on  December  15,  1885,  and  was 
buried  in  the  quiet  little  Washington  cemetery.     The  plain 
shaft  over  his  grave  is  inscribed  merely  "Robert  Toombs"; 
but  to  Georgians  that  inscription  is  eloquent. 
*  Stovall,  Toombs,  p.  370. 


INDEX 


Abolition  agitation,  resolutions  of 
the  "radical  political  abolition 
ists"  (1855),  50,  51;  texts  from 
the  Liberator,  51,  52;  Toombs's 
views  of  the  agitation,  76,  78, 
155-166,  179-183;  185-187,  202- 

202 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  28,  34,  35 
Andrews,  Eliza  F.,  War-time  Jour 
nal   of  a   Georgia   Girl,    quoted, 


Arc 


52>  253 
her,  W 


illiam  B.,  35 


146, 


Baldwin,  Abraham,  8 
Beauregard,  P.  G.  T.,  235,  245 
Bell,  John,  116,  190,  192,  193 
Benjamin,  Judah  P.,  116,  138, 

205 

Benning,  Henry  L.,  53 
Benton,  Thomas  H.,  54,  116 
Berrien,  John  M.,  9,   32,  35,   105, 

116 

Black,  Edward  J.,  30-32 
Blodgett,  Foster,  261 
Botts,  John  M.,  54 
Boyd,  Linn  60,  71,  74,  85,  86 
Breckinridge,    John    C.,    188,    192, 

193,  206 

Brown,  Joseph  E.,  on  Southern 
rights  (1850),  91,  92;  elected 
governor  of  Georgia,  171;  re- 
elected,  176,  177;  opposes  Howell 
Cobb,  189;  secession  policy, 
196,  198;  orders  capture  of  Fort 
Pulaski,  216;  war-time  admin 
istration,  246-248;  policy  in 
reconstruction,  255,  256;  chief- 
justice  of  Georgia,  263;  organizes 
the  Western  and  Atlantic  R.  R. 
Co.,  265;  quarrel  with  Toombs, 
266,  267 

Brownlow,  William  G.,  54 
Buchanan,  James,  60,  188;   elected 


President,  170;    opposes  Douglas 
and    squatter    sovereignty,    173; 
denies  validity  of  secession,  215 
Bullock,  Rufus  B.,  250-266 

Calhoun,    John    C,    29,    30,    118; 
author  of  Southern  address  (1849), 
50;  on  Mexican  war,  52;  project  for 
a  Southern  phalanx  in  Congress, 
59-62,   78;    lets    his  mantle   fall 
upon  Toombs,  79;   death,  79 
California,    acquisition  of,   41,   46, 
52;    question  of  slavery  in,   42, 
43,  55,  64,  68-70,  8 1,  85,  86,  98 
Cass,  Lewis,  48,  60,  116,  135 
Chase,  Salmon  P.,  116,  118 
Clarke,  John,  8 
Clarke  party  in  Georgia,  8,  18 
Clay,  Henry,  28733,  5^,  73,  79 
Clayton,  Augustin  S.,  9,  14 
Clayton,  John  M.,  56,  57 
Clingman,  Thomas  L.,  54,  73 
Cobb,  Howell,  34,  41,  52,  54,  60, 
74,  93,  107,  168,  190,  221,   224, 
225,  242;  elected  speaker,  66-73; 
campaigns  for  the  endorsement  of 
the   compromise  of  1850,  95-^98; 
aids  in  organizing  the  Constitu 
tional    Union    party,    99,     100; 
elected     governor     of     Georgia, 
103,    104;     proposed    for    presi 
dency  of  U.  S.,  188,  189;   elected 
president     of    the     Confederate 
Provisional    Congress,    222;     in 
military     service,     243;      bush- 
arbor  speech  (1868),  261 
Cobb,   Thomas    R.    R.,    199,    214, 

220,  221,  223,  224,  228,  242 

Colcock,  William  F.,  70,  80 
Colquitt,  Walter  T.,  30-32 
Compromise  of  1850,  73-88 
Cone,  Francis  T.,  16,  59 
Confederate    States    of    America, 


^^6 


INDEX 


Montgomery  convention  (Pro 
visional  Congress),  222-230;  elec 
tion  of  President,  223-227;  fram 
ing  of  Permanent  Constitution, 
228-230;  diplomatic  missions, 
230;  military  preparations,  232, 
233;  the  attack  on  Fort  Sumter, 
233-236;  military  operations  in 
Virginia,  236-239,  242,  245;  finan 
cial  policies  censured  by  Toombs, 
239,  248-250;  military  opera 
tions  in  Georgia,  250,  251;  col 
lapse  of  the  government,  251- 

253 

Congress  (U.  S.),  Toombs  elected 
to,  24;  new  Southern  members, 
1843-1845),  34,  35;  Calhoun's 
effort  to  establish  a  Southern 
block,  59-62;  speakership  contest 
(1849),  66-73 

Constitutional  Union  party,  of 
1850-1852,  99,  loo,  103-110;  of 
1860,  176,  190 

Cooper,  Mark  A.,  30-32 

Crawford,  George  W.,  65,  141,  142, 
219,  224,  225,  230 

Crawford,  William  H.,  8,  9,  15,  21, 

Crittenden,  John  J.,  54,  58,  60,  138, 
21 1 ;  compromise  resolutions  206- 
208 

Daniell,  W.  C,  59 

Davis,  Jefferson,  54,  55,  93,  116, 
170,  188,  205;  enters  Congress, 
35;  defeated  for  governorship  of 
Mississippi,  105;  denounces 
squatter  sovereignty,  172;  res 
olutions  on  slavery  in  the  terri 
tories,  184;  member  of  the  Sen 
ate  committee  of  thirteen,  206, 
207;  elected  President  of  the 
Confederate  States,  226,  227; 
administration,  229-253;  cap 
ture,  253 

Democratic  party,  in  Georgia  in 
Jacksonian  period,  18;  tendency 
toward  irresponsibility  in  finance, 
20-22;  and  to  social  radicalism, 
26;  its  clientele  in  the  South,  27; 
joined  by  Calhoun  and  his  fol 
lowing,  29-31;  new  Congress 
men,  Yancey,  Cobb,  Johnson, 


Davis,  34;  Oregon  policy,  37, 
38;  Mexican  policy,  39;  Southern 
rights  movement,  59-62;  speaker- 
ship  contest  of  1849,  66-73;  rift 
among  Georgia  Democrats  over 
the  endorsement  of  the  com 
promise  of  1850,  95,  103,  104; 
contest  of  Georgia  factions  for 
Democratic  "regularity,"  106- 
no;  election  of  Pierce,  no; 
Toombs  and  Stephens  join  the 
party,  168,  169;  election  of 
Buchanan,  170;  rift  over  squat 
ter  sovereignty,  170-173,  184; 
Charleston  convention,  188-190; 
Baltimore  convention,  190-192; 
Richmond  convention,  192;  cam 
paign  of  1868,  260,  261;  recap 
tures  control  in  Georgia,  266; 
nomination  of  Greeley  repudiated 
by  Toombs,  267;  Toombs's  opin 
ion  of  the  party  in  1877,  268,  269; 
election  of  Cleveland,  273 

District  of  Columbia,  questions  of 
slavery  and  the  slave-trade  in, 
54,  61,  69,  88,  98 

Dixon,  Archibald,  117 

Doolittle,  William  H.,  143,  144, 
206,  208 

Doty,  James   D.,    73-75,    80,    82, 

85 

Douglas,  Stephen  A.,  55,  116,  179, 
206,  21 1 ;  enters  Congress,  35; 
promotes  adjustment  of  New 
Mexico  and  California  ques 
tions,  75;  introduces  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  bill,  116-118;  advo 
cates  squatter  sovereignty  in 
Kansas,  170,  172;  opposed  by 
Davis  and  Buchanan,  172,  173; 
Toombs's  attitude  toward,  176, 
177;  presidential  candidacy  in 
the  Charleston  and  Baltimore 
conventions,  188-193 

Dred  Scott  case,  121,  130,  172,  188 

Federalist  party,  26 

Fessenden,    William    P.,    127,    128, 

J52 

Fillmore,  Millard,  accession  to  the 
presidency,  85;  influence  in  favor 
of  the  compromise  of  1850,  89; 
Know-nothing  candidate,  170 


INDEX 


277 


Foote,  Henry  S.,  54,  105,  106 
Fowler,  W.  C.,  The  Sectional  Con 
troversy,  quoted,  195 

Galphin  claim,  22,  84,  138-144 
Georgia,  description  of  the  pied 
mont  area,  3,  4;  industry  and 
society,  6,  7;  political  leaders  in 
the  early  nineteenth  century, 
8-10;  university  of,  11-14;  polit 
ical  issues  (1837-1844),  18-24; 
convention  of  1850,  91,  96-^99; 
county  resolutions  on  secession, 
211-214;  convention  of  1861,  214, 
219-221,  233;  prdinance  of  seces 
sion  adopted,  220;  military  opera 
tions  in,  250,  251;  constitutional 
convention  of  1877,  269-272 
Georgia  Platform,  96-99,  167,  169, 

Giddings,  Joshua  R.,  35,  71 
Gordon,  John  B.,  260 
Grady,  Henry,  272 
Greeley,  Horace,  58,  267 

Hale,  John  P.,  55,  124,  145 

Harrison,  William  Henry,  31-33 

Harlan,  James,  contested  senato 
rial  election,  148,  152 

Hayes,  Rutherford  B.,  268,  269 

Helper,  Hinton  R.,  54,  182 

Hill,  Benjamin  H.,  171,  176,  240, 
250,  259,  261,  264,  265 

Hill,  D.  H.,  244 

Hilliard,  Henry  W.,  89,  90,  105 

Holden,  William  W.,  54 

Holmes,  Isaac  E.,  59 

Holsey,  Hopkins,  91 

Hull,  William  Hope,  107 

Hunter,  Robert  M.  T.,  30,  35,  54, 
93,  188,  206,  237 

Iverson,  Alfred,  174,  175,  205,  241. 

ackson,  Andrew,  18,  26,  29 
ackson,  James,  8,  9 
effersonian  Democracy,  25 
enkins,  Charles  J.,  no,  167,  259, 

269 
Johnson,  Andrew,   34,  67,  71,  80, 

255»  257,  259 

Johnson,  Herschel  V.,  167,  190,  219, 
220,  250 


Johnston,  Joseph  E.,  238,  239,  252 

Kansas-Nebraska  act,  117-122,  168, 
169 

Kansas,  colonization  of,  122,  123; 
disorders  in,  123;  the  Toombs 
bill  for  the  admission  of,  124- 
128;  Lecompton  constitution, 
128-130;  squatter  sovereignty 
issue,  170 

King,  Preston,  35 

Know-nothing  party,  168,  170,  171, 
I75>  176 

Lee,  Robert  E.,  239,  244 
Liberator,  the,  texts  from,  51,  52 
Liberty     party,     platform     (1855), 

50>  Si 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  debates  with 
Douglas,  172;  elected  President, 
192,  193,  197;  blockade  procla 
mation,  236;  Davis  charged  with 
complicity  in  assassination  of, 

253 

Longstreet,  James  B.,  238,  245 
Lumpkin,  John  H.,  39,  60,  95 
Lumpkin,  Joseph  Henry,  16,  95 

McClellan,  George  B.,  238,  239, 
242-244 

McClernand,  John  A.,  74,  75,  79, 
80 

McDonald,  Charles  J.,  95,  98,  103 

McDuffie,  George,  32 

Mason,  James  M.,  116,  145 

Memminger,  C.  G.,  224 

Mexican  war,  35,  39-41,  52 

Missouri  compromise,  81 

Missourians,  activities  of,  in  Kan 
sas,  123 

Nashville  convention  (1850),  94, 
98,  197 

Naval  retiring  board,  action  cen 
sured  by  Toombs,  145-148 

New  Mexico,  acquisition  of,  41,  46, 
52;  question  of  slavery  in,  42,  43, 
5£,  64,  68-70,  81,  85,  86,  98 

Nisbet,  Eugenius  A.,  100,  219,  220, 
221 

Nullification  issue,  in  Georgia,  9,  18 

Oregon,  Toombs's  speech  on,  36,  37 


278 


INDEX 


Pierce,  Franklin,  elected  President, 
109,  no 

Planters,  political  problems  and 
policies  of,  25,  28,  51-54;  finan 
cial  distress  of,  33 

Polk,  James  K.,  36,  37,  39,  40,  61 

Preston,  William  B.,  bill  for  Cali 
fornia  statehood,  62,  63,  83,  84 

Pryor,  Roger  A.,  233,  235 

Quitman,  John  A.,  53,  54,  101 

Reed,  John  C,  estimate  of  Toombs 
as  a  lawyer,  16,  17;  describes 
Toombs's  speech  at  Lexington, 
Ga.,  104;  interprets  Toombs's 
course  on  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
bill,  120;  characterizes  Toombs's 
non-sectional  activities  in  the 
Senate,  150-154 

Republican  party,  beginnings,  168; 
Fremont's  candidacy,  169,  170; 
increase  of  strength,  172,  174, 
175;  Toombs's  charges  against, 
180-182,  185,  186;  speakership 
election  (1860),  181-183;  .nom 
ination  and  election  of  Lincoln 
as  President,  190,  192,  193; 
Toombs's  doubt  as  to  the  party's 
purposes,  197,  198,  204,  206;  at 
titude  of  members  in  the  Senate 
committee  of  thirteen,  207-211; 
reconstruction  programme,  258, 
259;  Liberal  Republican  move 
ment,  267;  enlightened  policy  of 
Hayes,  268,  269 

Rhett,  Robert  Barnwell,  35,  53- 
55,  95,  101,  229 

Rhodes',  J.  F.,  History  of  the  United 
States,  criticized,  56,  57 

Scott,  Winfield,  nomination  of,  109; 
Toombs  repudiates  the  ticket, 
110-114 

Seabrook,  Whitemarsh  B.,  53 

Sectionalism,  crux  of,  in  control 
ling  the  U.  S.  Senate,  49 

Seddon,  James  A.,  87 

Semmes,  Raphael,  232 

Seward,  William  H.,  64,  65,  79,  116, 
117,  126,  172,  183,  187,  206, 
210,  230 

Sherman,  John,  181,  183 


Slaveholding  regime,  Toombs's 
addresses  on  the  (1853  and  1856), 
155-166 

Slavery,  controversy  between 
Georgia  and  Maine,  23;  the 
twenty-first  rule,  35;  Toombs 
on  the  territorial  question,  41-43, 
68-70,  8 1,  82;  problem  of  con 
trolling  the  Senate,  49,  50;  pro 
gramme  of  the  "  radical  political 
abolitionists,"  50,  51;  the  issue 
paramount,  53;  the  Wilmot 
proviso,  55-57,  59;  President 
Taylor's  attitude,  64-66;  com 
promise  of  1850,  73-88;  the 
Georgia  platform,  97-99;  the 
Scott-Pierce  campaign,  113,  114; 
the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  117- 
122;  emigration  to  Kansas,  122, 
123;  the  Toombs  bill  for  the 
admission  of  Kansas,  124-128; 
the  English  bill,  128-130; 
Toombs's  lectures  on  the  slave- 
holding  regime,  155-166;  the, 
rise  of  the  Republican  party, 
168-170;  the  Dred  Scott  decision, 
172;  Toombs's  criticisms  of  the 
Republican  party,  179-183,  185- 
187,  200,  202,  209,  210;  Georgia 
county  resolutions,  212-214; 
statement  of  "rebel"  demands 
by  Toombs,  217-219 

Slaves,  fugitive,  rendition  ques 
tion,  54 

Slave-trade,  in  the  District  of 
Columbia,  54,  61,  88 

Slidell,  John,  116 

Smith,  Gerritt,  50,  137 

Smith,  Truman,  35 

Soule,  Pierre,  54 

South,  political  problems  of  the 
planters,  25;  alternative  policies, 
available  in  response  to  the  abo 
lition  agitation,  51-54;  Calhoun's 
project  for  a  block  in  Congress, 
60-64;  Toombs  takes  the  lead  in 
aggressive  defense,  68;  secession 
movement,  of  1848-1852,  91- 
95,  105,  106;  endorsement  of  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  120;  ten 
dency  of  Whigs  to  join  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  169;  apprehensions 
at  the  growth  of  the  Republican 


INDEX 


279 


party,  172;  position  in  1860  ana 
lyzed  by  Toombs,  179-183;  pol 
icy  in  the  conduct  of  the  U.  S. 
government  described  by  Toombs, 
185,  186;  secession  movement  of 
1860-1861,  196-222;  "rebel" 
demands  stated  by  Toombs,  217- 
219;  Montgomery  convention, 
222-230;  the  war  for  independ 
ence,  232-251;  reconstruction, 
252-268 

South  Carolina,  resistance  resolu 
tions  adopted  by  the  legislature 
(1848),  91;  convention  of  1852 
decides  not  to  secede,  106;  seces 
sion  of,  207,  214,  215 

Southern  address  of  1849,  50;  of 
1850,  93;  of  1860,  205,  206 

Stephens,  Alexander  H.,  43,  57, 
67,  74,  82-85,  189,  199,  205,  214, 
228,  229,  241,  261;  at  college, 
12;  beginning  of  friendship  with 
Toombs,  17,  18;  in  Georgia  leg 
islature,  19-23;  joins  the  Whig 
party,  30,  33;  enters  Congress, 
34;  on  the  Mexican  war,  52; 
opposes  the  Clayton  compro 
mise  bill,  56,  57;  on  the  question 
of  Southern  independence  (1840), 
92,93;  campaigns  for  the  endorse 
ment  of  the  compromise  of  1850, 
95-98;  aids  in  launching  the  Con 
stitutional  Union  party  (1850), 
99,  106;  opposes  the  Know- 
nothing  movement,  and  joins 
the  Democratic  party,  168,  169; 
retires  from  Congress,  173-175; 
supports  Douglas  for  President, 
190-192;  opposes  secession,  201- 
203;  elected  Vice-President  of 
the  Confederacy,  225;  alienated 
from  Davis,  246;  participates 
in  the  lease  of  the  Western  and 
Atlantic  railroad,  265,  266;  dies, 
272 

Sumner,  Charles,  101,  116,  118,  126 

Tariff  issue  in  Georgia  (1828- 
1833),  9,  14,  18;  Toombs's  atti 
tude  on  protection,  38,  39,  148- 
150 

Taylor,  Zachary,  Toombs  advo 
cates  nomination  of,  48;  elected 


President,  58,  59;  administra 
tion  of,  64-66,  82-85 

Territories,  question  of  slavery  in 
New  Mexico  and  Utah,  42,  43, 
54,55,61,  81 

Texas,  annexation  of,  35,  39,  40, 
52;  New  Mexico  boundary  ques 
tion,  83-85,  87,  88 

Thompson,  Jacob,  35,  215 

Tilden,  Samuel  J.,  268 

Toombs  bill,  for  the  admission  of 
Kansas,  124-128 

Toombs,  Gabriel,  237 

Toombs,  Robert,  birth,  6;  rearing, 
7,  n;  political  antecedents,  8- 
10;  at  the  University  of  Georgia, 
11-13;  further  education,  14; 
admission  to  the  bar,  14,  15; 
marriage  and  home  life,  15; 
characteristics  as  a  lawyer,  16, 
17;  beginning  of  friendship  with 
Stephens,  17,  18;  in  the  Georgia 
legislature,  19-24;  elected  to 
Congress,  24;  campaigns  for 
Harrison  and  Tyler,  32;  speech 
on  Oregon,  36,  37;  speech  on  the 
tariff  (1846),  38;  promotes  Whig 
solidarity,  39;  views  on  Texan 
annexation,  39,  52;  on  Mexican 
relations,  39,  41,  42,  45;  on  the 
two-million  bill,  40,  41;  on  the 
ten-regiment  bill,  41-43;  inter 
course  with  constituents,  44; 
assiduity  in  House  routine,  44, 
45;  on  congressional  expenditures, 
45-47;  on  the  army  and  navy, 
46;  on  congressional  proprieties, 
47;  championship  of  Southern 
rights,  42,  43,  48;  on  the  alter 
native  policies  available  for  the 
South,  51-55;  on  the  Wilmot  pro 
viso,  54;  on  the  Clayton  compro 
mise,  56,  57;  advocates  nomina 
tion  and  election  of  Zachary 
Taylor,  48,  58,  59;  opposes  a 
Southern  block  in  Congress,  60, 
61;  supports  Preston's  bill  for 
California  statehood,  62-64;  re 
lations  with  Taylor,  64-66,  82- 
85;  obstructs  election  of  Speaker, 
66-73;  on  the  California  bill, 
75~?8;  "Hamilcar"  speech,  81, 
82;  promotes  the  adoption  of  the 


280 


INDEX 


compromise  measures  of  1850, 
86-90;  campaigns  in  Georgia  for 
the  endorsement  of  the  compro 
mise,  95-98;  aids  in  launching 
the  Constitutional  Union  party, 
99-102,  106;  elected  to  the  U.  S. 
Senate,  105;  repudiates  the  nom 
ination  of  Scott,  110-114;  speech 
on  the  nature  of  parties,  in, 
112;  on  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
bill,  118,  121;  on  disturbances 
in  Kansas,  124,  129;  introduces 
the  Toombs  bill  for  the  admission 
of  Kansas,  124-126;  attitude 
toward  military  appropriations, 
131;  on  pensions,  132;  on  river- 
and-harbor  bills,  133-138;  on 
the  Galphin  claim,  138-144;  on 
the  naval  retiring  board,  145- 
148;  on  the  Harlan  contested 
election,  148;  speech  on  the  tariff, 
(1859),  148-150;  J.  C.  Reed's 
characterization  of  his  non-sec 
tional  activities  in  the  Senate, 
150-154;  views  on  slavery,  155- 
166;  denounces  Know-nothing- 
ism,  168,  169;  on  Douglas  and 
the  Dred  Scott  decision,  177,  178; 
"doorsill"  speech  (January, 
1860)  on  the  state  of  the  coun 
try,  179-183;  opposes  the  Davis 
resolutions,  184;  on  the  South 
and  the  Republican  party,  185- 
187;  in  the  campaign  of  1860, 
191,  192;  advocacy  of  secession, 
196-206,  209-211;  in  the  Senate 
committee  of  thirteen,  206-211; 
telegram  to  the  people  of  Georgia, 
209,  210;  farewell  speech  in 
the  Senate,  216-219;  work  in 
the  Georgia  secession  convention, 
219-222;  in  the  Confederate  con 
vention  at  Montgomery,  222-230; 
defeated  for  the  presidency  of 
the  Confederate  States,  223-227; 
appointed  Confederate  Secretary 
of  State,  227,  228;  assists  in 
framing  the  Permanent  Consti 
tution  of  the  Confederate  States, 
228-230;  work  as  Secretary  of 
State,  230-237;  opposes  attack 
on  Fort  Sumter,  233-235;  ap 
pointed  brigadier-general,  237, 


238;  elected  to  Confederate  Sen 
ate,  240,  241;  declines  to  serve, 
241;  in  battle  of  Malvern  Hill, 
243,  244;  at  Antietam,  245; 
resigns  command,  245,  246; 
criticizes  policies  of  Davis,  246- 
249;  resists  policy  of  restricting 
cotton  production,  247;  declines 
to  run  for  governorship  of 
Georgia,  247;  proposes  financial 
reforms  for  the  Confederacy, 
249;  defeated  for  Confederate 
Senate,  250;  serves  as  colonel  in 
Georgia  State  Guard,  250,  251; 
in  exile,  254-257;  attitude  toward 
reconstruction,  255-269;  never 
regains  citizenship,  257;  rebuilds 
law  practise,  258;  promotes  and 
controls  the  framing  of  a  new 
Georgia  state  constitution,  269- 
272;  death,  273 
Towns,  George  W.,  95 
Troup,  George  M.,  8,  9,  30,  31 
Troup  party  in  Georgia,  8,  14,  18 
Tugalo  Democrats,  in  Georgia,  108- 

no 
Tyler,  John,  28-33 

University   of  Georgia,   Toombs   a 

student  at,  11-14 
Underwood,  John  W.  H.,  90 

Van  Buren,  Martin,  18,  29-31,  59, 
60 

Wade,  Benjamin  F.,  116,  136,  152, 

185,  187 

Walker,  Robert  J.,  170 
Washington,  Georgia,  early  life  in, 

4-7 

Webster,  Daniel,  29,  54,  79,  no 

Weed,  Thurlow,  58 

Western  and  Atlantic  railroad,  21, 
22,265,  266 

Whig  party,  State  Rights  party  in 
Georgia  joins  the  fusion,  18;  con 
servatism  in  financial  policy,  21, 
22;  influence  of  plantation  inter 
ests,  25;  heterogeneous  coalition, 
27-29;  abandoned  by  Calhoun, 
Wise,  Tyler,  Hunter,  Colquitt, 
Cooper  and  Black,  29-31;  cam 
paign  of  1840,  31,  32;  Stephens 


INDEX 


281 


and  Toombs  sent  to  Congress, 
34;  party  solidarity  promoted 
by  Toombs,  38-43;  campaign  of 
1848,  48,  58,  59;  anti-slavery 
wing  controls  Taylor,  64-66;  the 
speakership  contest  of  1849,  66- 
73;  Toombs  and  Stephens  re 
monstrate  with  Taylor,  82-85; 
Fillmore's  accession,  85;  fusion 
of  Whigs  and  Union  Democrats 
in  Georgia,  94-96,  99,  100,  103- 
108;  restoration  of  Whig  align 
ment,  107,  108;  Toombs  and 
Stephens  repudiate  the  nomina 


tion  of  Scott,  110-114;  they 
attempt  to  heal  the  schism,  167; 
but  the  party  is  wrecked  by  the 
wrangle  over  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  bill,  167,  168 

Wilmot,  David,  35,  67,  73 

Wilmot  proviso,  35,  41-43*  4-8,  52* 

Winthrop,   Robert  C,   35,  40,  67, 

73>  ioi 
Wise,  Henry  A.,  28 

Yancey,  William  Lowndes,  29,  34, 
S3>  54>  9S»  IOI>  IOS>  !?2>  188,  190 


A  HISTORY  OF  TRANSPORTATION  IN 
THE    EASTERN   COTTON   BELT   TO    1860 

BY  ULRICH  BONNELL  PHILLIPS,  Pn.D. 

Cloth,  I2mo.,  $2.75  net 

"There  is  no  more  interesting  or  important  phase  of 
American  economic  history  than  is  presented  by  the  origin 
and  development  of  transportation.  The  history  of  high 
ways,  canals  and  railroads  in  the  South  before  the  Civil  War 
had  received  little  attention  before  Professor  Phillips  took 
up  the  study.  .  .  .  One  can  easily  share  some  of  the  enthu 
siasm  which  causes  Professor  Phillips  to  say:  'To  me  the 
antebellum  South  is  the  most  interesting  theme  in  the  history 
of  this  continent.'  .  .  . 

"After  an  introduction  of  twenty  pages  giving  a  general 
survey  of  the  transportation  problem  in  the  South,  Professor 
Phillips  devotes  two  chapters  to  highway  and  canal  develop 
ment  ....  prior  to  1830.  Then  follow  accounts  of  the 
Charleston  and  Hamburg  Railroad  and  the  premature 
Charleston  project,  the  Georgia  Railroad  and  Banking  Com 
pany,  the  Central  of  Georgia  system,  the  Western  and  Atlan 
tic  (built  by  Georgia)  and  various  minor  branch  roads.  The 
concluding  chapter  describes  the  beginning  made  during  the 
five  years  before  the  war  in  the  integration  and  cooperation 
of  the  hitherto  independent  roads  and  summarize  the  effect 
of  the  railways  upon  the  social  and  economic  organization.  .  .  . 

"Professor  Phillips  has  written  a  scholarly  book  rich  in 
detail.  He  has  placed  students  of  social  as  well  as  economic 
history  under  lasting  obligations." —  Professor  Emory  John 
son  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  in  the  Journal  of 
Political  Economy. 

"  The  western  parts  of  the  Carolinas,  like  upper  Virginia, 
were  gradually  drawn  to  the  support  of  the  low-country,  or 
the  cotton  and  tobacco  belts,  and  consequently  of  slavery, 
through  state  systems  of  internal  improvements,  promised  or 
executed,  or  through  the  steady  encroachments  of  the  cotton 
and  tobacco  planters  upon  the  poorer,  idealistic  up-country. 
Of  none  of  these  have  we  adequate  accounts,  save  in  Pro 
fessor  Phillips's  Transportation  in  the  Eastern  Cotton  Belt.'9 
—  Professor  William  E.  Dodd  of  the  University  of  Chicago, 
in  the  American  Historical  Review. 

THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

PUBLISHERS  64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE  NEW  YORK 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 

or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

Bldg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 

University  of  California 

Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

•  2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 
(510)642-6753 

•  1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing 
books  to  NRLF 

•  Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made 
4  days  prior  to  due  date 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

AUG  2  5  2004 


DD20   15M  4-02 


CU4 


. 


YB  4487 


LIBRARY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


